Summary: Ms Y complained about the Council’s decision to reject her application for visitor parking vouchers for her care home. We have not found fault by the Council in the way it made its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I am calling Ms Y, complains about the Council’s decision to reject her application for resident visitors parking vouchers for the children’s care home she runs from her property. She says:

• The Council issued them with visitors vouchers for over 20 years. It has now decided not to issue any further vouchers because the residential qualification criteria are not met: and
• Visitors being unable to park outside the home is causing huge difficulties. Therapists attending the home with a lot of equipment, staff arriving for overnight shifts and families visiting children need to be able to park directly outside and not some distance away.

2. Ms Y wants the Council to resolve the problem by allowing them to qualify for visitors vouchers in the same way as other residents and businesses in the area.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Ms Y, made enquiries of the Council, and read the information Ms Y and the Council provided about the complaint.
7. I invited Ms Y and the Council to comment on a draft version of this decision. I considered their responses before making this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Our published guidance on Good Administrative Practice

8. Our guidance sets out the standards we expect when we investigate a council’s actions.
9. We expect councils to be open and accountable. This includes being open and clear about policies and procedures and ensuring information, and any advice provided, is clear, accurate and complete.

The Council’s resident parking and visitor parking schemes

Resident parking permit terms and conditions

10. Information about resident parking permits is published on the Council’s website. This says a resident parking permit allows a resident to park on the roads in a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ).
11. The terms and conditions say:

• The permit holder must be living permanently at the address in the CPZ for which the parking permit is required;
• A resident must be 18 or over to be eligible for a permit;

12. If residency is not confirmed by automated checks of Electoral Roll and Council Tax data an applicant is required to submit proof of residency – a digital copy of one of the following documents as evidence of address:

• A signed shorthold tenancy or solicitors’ letter of completion confirming the property is for the applicant’s residency only;
• A letter from HM Revenues or Department of Work and Pensions, signed and recently dated;
• A signed Housing Association or Council Tenancy Agreement; or
• Driving License photo identity card showing updated address within the CPZ.

Resident visitor parking vouchers terms and conditions

13. Information about visitor parking vouchers is published on the Council’s website. This says a visitor parking voucher allows visitors to a resident to park on the roads in a CPZ. Visitor vouchers can be bought by residents who are over 18 and live in a CPZ.
14. The terms and conditions say If an applicant’s residency is not confirmed by automated checks of Electoral and Council Tax data, they will be required to submit proof of residency (as set out in paragraph 12 above).

What happened

Background

15. Ms Y runs a children’s care home from a property she owns. She does not live at the property. The Council issued the home with visitors vouchers under its resident visitor parking scheme for twenty years, up until November 2022.
16. In November 2022, the Council rejected her application for further visitor vouchers. It told her the home did not meet the criteria under its terms and conditions for these vouchers.
17. Ms Y complained to the Council about its decision. In response the Council said:

• Its terms and conditions for resident visitor parking vouchers had not changed since 2002 and did not extend to residential care homes or their visitors;
• Although it had previously issued visitor vouchers to the home, this was not authorised under the terms and conditions in place during this period; and
• It changed its Parking Permit IT system when the service moved from physical permits to online e-parking permits. The new system does not allow the issue of resident visitor vouchers without the evidence of residency required by the terms and conditions.

18. Ms Y was unhappy with the Council’s response and brought her complaint to us.

The Council’s response to our enquiries

19. The Council told us:

• The purpose of visitor vouchers is to allow residents to receive visitors; and
• Its policy has not changed. It never extended to visitors to residential and care homes. But the unauthorised practice of issuing vouchers to those who do not qualify for them has been stopped.

20. It also said:

• Visitor vouchers allow a visitor to park in the CPZ but do not guarantee a parking space outside the resident’s home;
• Parking restrictions in the CPZ do not apply between 6.30pm and 8.00am;
• The property’s status as a care home may allow certain visitors at certain times access to Essential Services Permits;
• The area is easily accessed by public transport, with underground stations and bus services within walking distance. Visitors with mobility issues who have a Blue Badge may park in the residential, and disabled parking bays as well as on single yellow lines for up to 3 hours in the area; and
• The Council’s transport policies promote the use of sustainable transport, with many transport programmes currently being implemented to reduce car use in residential area.

My findings – was there fault by the Council causing injustice?

21. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We can only decide whether there was fault in the way it was reached.
22. And it is not our role to tell a council what its policy is or how to interpret it. But we will consider whether a council has been clear and open about its policies and procedures in accordance with the standards in our published guidance.
23. Based on the evidence provided, my view is the Council met our expected standard of good administrative practice when it made its decision to reject Ms Y’s application for visitor parking vouchers in November 2022.
24. I consider its published terms and conditions for resident parking and visitor voucher parking schemes clearly set out the eligibility criteria and proof of residency required. My understanding is these criteria have not changed over the last twenty years.
25. So, although in the past Ms Y was issued with resident visitor parking vouchers, I consider it was clear she and the home were not eligible for them under the scheme terms and conditions. I understand this was an informal concession. I have not seen any evidence to indicate the Council led Ms Y to believe she met the criteria or that she had been granted any formal exemption.
26. The Council decided in November 2022, following the introduction of a new system for processing applications, it would not issue Ms Y with further visitor vouchers because she did not meet its criteria. It made this decision after considering Ms Y’s representations about its previous practice and the impact on the home of not being issued with vouchers.
27. I appreciate Ms Y is disappointed about the Council’s decision. But, based on the evidence seen so far, I have not found fault by the Council in the way it made this decision.
28. If anyone living at the property meets the criteria for a resident parking permit or visitor parking vouchers it is open to them to apply for these in the same way as other residents in the CPZ.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have completed my investigation. I have not found fault by the Council in the way it made its decision about Ms Y’s application for parking vouchers.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman