Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the refusal to extend her disabled parking bay. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. The injustice Miss X claims also results primarily from the actions of third parties, rather than the Council’s decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council has refused to extend her disabled parking bay. She believes its decision breaches the Equality Act 2010. She says other vehicles often park up to the existing line of the disabled parking bay and believes this will obstruct her means of access to her new vehicle.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
5. We also cannot decide if the Council has breached the Equality Act 2010; this is a matter for the courts.
6. The Council has clearly considered Miss X’s disability and this was the reason it agreed to consult on extending her disabled parking bay. But following objections to the proposal it decided not to go ahead with it. This was a decision it was entitled to reach and it has explained the reasons for it to Miss X. While it is clear Miss X disagrees with the decision I have seen no evidence of fault in the way it was reached and I therefore find no basis to criticise it.
7. Miss X has provided photos of other vehicles parked up to the line with the disabled parking bay, and over it, and it is clear this may affect her access to her vehicle. But this is the result of the inconsiderate actions of other motorists, rather than any fault by the Council. The existing bay already provides suitable access for Miss X to get to her vehicle and if other motorists park within the lines of the bay Miss X may contact the Council to ask it to take action. Extending the parking bay would provide more of a buffer for Miss X to access her vehicle but it would provide no guarantee that other motorists would not encroach into it as they do now.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate @’s complaint because @

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman