Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to review the parking restrictions in place for his property. 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 review the restrictions in place for his new build property which mean he is not eligible for a parking permit.

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 may decide not to start an investigation if 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))
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 the decision making, 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 lives in a newbuild property which has a restriction in place, as a condition of the granting of planning permission, which means residents of the property are not eligible for parking permits. Mr X asked the Council to carry out a review of the restriction and to remove it.
8. Mr X says the planning permission for his development was granted along with other developments. He says his development had a transport review which said it was unlikely to create any impact on the current parking stress. He has a vehicle which he needs for his job and it would be helpful for his family to have a permit.
9. The Council explained Mr X was not eligible for a permit. The development was granted planning permission in line with the officer recommendation that all the development sites would include limitation to access to parking permits. The condition clearly states that residents would not be eligible for a parking permit and that the restriction would remain permanently in place.
10. The Council considered Mr X’s request and the information he provided in support of it but decided not to allow a review of the current restrictions. It explained this was because to do so would go against its planning regulations and would set a precedent for residents to also challenge the parking restrictions in other car free developments.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council here. The restriction was a condition of the planning permission for the property and will have been apparent via the relevant checks and searches which are carried out as a part of the buying process. It will also have been reflected in the purchase price of the property. The Council considered Mr X’s request to carry out a review and clearly explained its reasons for not agreeing it. This is a decision the Council is entitled to make. Whilst I acknowledge Mr X is unhappy with the outcome, there is no sign of fault by the Council here.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman