Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s adoption of the right to challenge parking policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has not adopted the “right to challenge parking policy”. He says this is out of line with the Council’s core values. He also complains the Council delayed responding to his complaint.

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 or continue 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The “right to challenge parking policies” is statutory guidance which states councils should have a petition scheme in place to enable people and businesses to raise petitions about parking restrictions in place for a specific location.
6. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has a petition scheme in place and information about this is available on the Council’s website. In its complaint responses, the Council told Mr X about the scheme and directed him to its website. It apologised to him for the delay responding to his complaint, which is an appropriate remedy for any distress caused by this. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman