Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to issue a penalty charge notice when she parked an accessible minibus across two disabled parking bays in one of its car parks. She said the decision discriminated against the people she transports. There was no fault in the Council’s decision making or in its consideration of the equality issues Miss X raised in her complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s decision to issue a penalty charge notice when she parked an accessible minibus across two disabled parking bays in one of its car parks.
2. The minibus has a ramp at the back for disabled access, and Miss X said it will not fit into one disabled parking bay at the car park.
3. Miss X said the lack of suitable parking for larger disabled access vehicles discriminates against the disabled people she transports. It also affects Miss X’s ability to carry out her support role.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, 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. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Miss X provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
8. Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Disabled parking spaces

9. The British Standards Institution (BSI) recommends disabled bays should be 2.4 metres wide and 4.8 metres long.
10. The bays must be big enough for people with mobility impairments to use safely and with ease.
11. If someone complains about the size or location of disabled parking bays, the owner or responsible body must follow this up and consider reasonable adjustments.

The Equality Act

12. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
13. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
14. The relevant protected characteristic from the Equality Act in this case is disability.
15. Direct discrimination occurs when a person treats another less favourably than they treat or would treat others because of a protected characteristic.
16. Indirect discrimination may occur when a service provider applies an apparently neutral provision, criterion or practice which puts persons sharing a protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage.
17. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
18. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.

What happened

19. I have summarised below some key events leading to Miss X complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
20. Miss X transported two wheelchair users to a local park using an accessible minibus. The minibus has a ramp at the back so passengers can get in and out safely. This means the mini bus needs extra space when parked.
21. The car park Miss X used has a row of back-to-back disabled parking bays running down the middle.
22. When Miss X arrived at the car park, she found the disabled parking bays were not long enough to fit the minibus when its ramp was down. To ensure her passengers had enough space, Miss X parked the minibus across two bays. The minibus was partly in one bay and partly in the bay behind as well.
23. A Council enforcement officer issued Miss X a penalty charge notice (PCN) for parking beyond the bay markings.
24. Miss X challenged the PCN, but the Council rejected her representations. It said it correctly issued the PCN.
25. Miss X complained to the Council. She questioned the fairness of the Council’s decision and asked how it is complying with the Equality Act. She said the Council discriminated against disabled people by denying them the chance to use the park. Miss X said the minibus she drove is 6.2 metres long, with an accessible ramp needing three metres of space behind. She said she had to park across two bays as the mini bus would overhang if she parked in a single bay.
26. The Council said it was correct to issue the PCN. It said if the minibus did not fit in a single bay, then alternate arrangements would need to be made. It suggested Miss X could have parked the minibus correctly, within one bay, after her passengers got out. It also said the disabled bays are central within the car park to ensure people have enough room at each end to load and unload passengers.
27. In a later response, the Council said all vehicle tyres must be within the markings of a bay. It considered, based on the images of the contravention, Miss X could have parked within one space. If she had, it would not have issued a PCN.
28. In its final complaint response, the Council said:
• While there is currently no provision for large vehicles like mini buses or coaches to park at this location, it is undertaking a review and will consider Miss X’s concerns as part of this. It is also reviewing general accessibility of the park.
• Miss X can park in a separate car park for visitors with accessibility requirements. Though that car park has limited spaces, so Miss X should call or email the Council ahead of time to make sure a space is available.
• It recognised Miss X said she needed three metres behind the minibus. However, the British standard for accessible parking bays is 2.4 metres wide and 4.8 metres long. It considered it is reasonable for drivers to park wholly within a bay after passengers have exited.
• The terms and conditions of the car park state drivers must park wholly within a bay.

My investigation

29. Miss X told me the smaller car park the Council referred to in its complaint response is not a suitable alternative. She said it is a long walk from the park. She also said the people she was transporting need one to one care. It would not be fair to leave them with one carer if Miss X had to drop them off and then look for a parking space. She feels the Council is discriminating against the people she supports.
30. The Council told me, once Miss X unloaded her passengers, she could have moved the minibus forwards or backwards rather than leaving it in the middle of two bays. It said if Miss X parked with the wheels as closely as possible within the lines of a single bay, even if the vehicle was overhanging, it could have exercised discretion and cancelled the PCN.
31. The Council said its limited resources means it is not possible to ensure all facilities suit the diverse and unique needs of every individual. However, it said it is happy to consider reasonable adjustments.
32. The Council recognised the car park in question currently lacks provision for larger accessible vehicles. It said it is reviewing the layout of the car park to expand the number of accessible bays. However, it said the current accessible bays comply with relevant guidelines and are positioned in the middle of the car park to allow more space behind the vehicle for accessibility. It considers current arrangements, including the availability of the second car park, do meet its duties under the Equality Act.
33. The Council considers it is reasonable for people to research the parking facilities at the location before visiting, or failing that seek assistance from a member of its parks team on arrival. The Council also said that where wheelchair users have difficulty accessing the park, its parks team can provide assistance.

Analysis

34. I did not see evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to issue Miss X a PCN. Miss X did park her vehicle across two bays, a fact she does not dispute.
35. However, Miss X does not consider the car park is accessible for larger disabled vehicles. She wanted the Council to consider the individual circumstances of her case, and the reason why she parked where she did.
36. I found there was some confusion over the Council’s comments about Miss X needing to find somewhere else to park once the passengers were out of the vehicle. Miss X took this to mean she must drop her passengers off at the park and then leave them while she searched for parking. However, the Council told me what it meant was for Miss X to let her passengers out in the car park before she manoeuvred into a space.
37. I am satisfied the Council properly considered Miss X’s complaints and engaged with the points she made. It recognised the reason she parked across two bays, but it decided Miss X could still have parked with the tyres of the vehicle within one bay.
38. The parking bays themselves comply with BSI standards in terms of size. BSI guidelines also require the Council to consider complaints about the disabled parking bays, and consider whether to make reasonable adjustments. I am satisfied the Council did this. The Council said it positioned the bays in the middle of the car park to make them more accessible. As above, it considered Miss X can fit into a disabled parking bay after letting her passengers out of the vehicle. If Miss X does this in future, the Council confirmed it will not issue a PCN. Or if an enforcement officer issues a PCN, the Council can exercise discretion and cancel it.
39. Alternatively, the Council suggested a different car park at the park site and said its staff can provide assistance. It also confirmed it is reviewing parking arrangements and will include Miss X’s complaint within its review.
40. On that basis, I did not find fault in the Council’s consideration of the issues Miss X raised. The Ombudsman cannot find the Council in breach of the Equality Act. Our role is to assess whether the Council properly considered its duties and the circumstances of the individuals involved. I am satisfied it did that.

Back to top

Final decision

41. I have completed my investigation. There was no fault in the Council’s decision making or in its consideration of the equality issues Miss X raised in her complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman