Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to enforce a parking contravention. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision not to take enforcement action against a motorist who was partially parked across his dropped kerb and about the Council’s view there was no contravention for it to enforce.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council about a motorist who was parked partially across his dropped kerb, which he said was preventing him from accessing his driveway, and asked it to take enforcement action.
8. The Council considered the photographs Mr X provided and a site visit was carried out by a senior officer. It informed Mr X there was no contravention for it to enforce because the vehicle did not have a full wheel over the start of the dropped kerb. As the vehicle was not in contravention there was no enforcement action it could take. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision.
9. Whilst I acknowledge Mr X’s dissatisfaction with the Council’s decision, I can see no sign of fault by the Council here. It took suitable action in carrying out a site visit and assessing whether there was a contravention being committed and one it would enforce. It explained the factors its officers consider when deciding this. It is a matter of professional judgement for the officers to assess and decide. We cannot question the merits of the Council’s decisions where, as here, there is no sign of fault in the process by which it was reached.
10. Mr X also complained about the Council’s handling of his complaint. We do not consider complaints about complaint handling issues in isolation where we have decided we will not consider the substantive matter. This is because it is not a good use of our limited public resources to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman