Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking issues outside the complainant’s home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s response after he reported multiple parking problems outside his home. He says the steps taken by the Council have not helped and it ignored his suggestions.

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 impact 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X reported multiple parking and traffic issues to the Council. These included illegal parking, engines idling and deliveries. He said work on a housing estate in the area had displaced traffic and deliveries to his street. He said his health and enjoyment of his home have been affected.
5. In response the Council explained the action it had taken. This included increasing and targeting the enforcement patrols, repainting the yellow lines, putting up notices about engine idling and arranging a visit, and inviting Mr X to provide the details of cars that leave their engines running so it could write to the owners. The Council explained the number of patrols it had done since September, the number of Penalty Charge Notices issued, and said a review had shown a decrease in the number of vehicles breaching the loading ban. It explained why it could not implement Mr X’s suggestions and said it will continue to monitor and take further action if needed. The Council suggested Mr X could contact the organisation responsible for the building work.
6. I appreciate Mr X found the parking issues disruptive and stressful. And it may be that the action taken by the Council has not provided a complete resolution to the difficulties and some problems may continue. However, I cannot see fault in the way the Council responded; it took a range of steps, explained what it had done, explained the outcome of a review and why it could not do what Mr X had suggested. There is insufficient evidence of fault in what the Council has done so far. A full resolution may not be possible during the building work but this does not mean the Council has done anything wrong. It provided a proportionate response within the resources it has.
7. It is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome as the Council has already implemented a range of actions and it is not required to follow every recommendation a person may make. If the situation deteriorates Mr X can make new reports to the Council and the Council can decide if it needs to take additional action.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman