Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision on the charges to apply to a resident parking permit scheme. It is unlikely we would find fault and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the increase in costs of a resident parking permit in his area, which he said were unreasonable and unjustified. He also expressed dissatisfaction in the way the Council considered his complaint about the same matter. Mr X now wants the Council to reduce the costs and provide a refund for the last two years.

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, 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 I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X complained to the Council, because he said the increase in costs for a resident parking permit were unreasonably high when compared to inflationary costs. He also said they were unjustified when compared to other neighbouring boroughs including that he already pays for transport costs through other road charging schemes.
5. In the Council’s reply it explained the following:
• It introduced controlled parking zones to manage traffic and air pollution;
• it detailed how it had consulted with residents, and;
• the decision on charges had been agreed by the relevant cabinet members.
6. Given the Council’s replies here it is unlikely we would find any fault. In any case, it is not our role to determine what a Council charges its residents and nor could we direct the Council to reimburse charges of these nature. There is therefore no worthwhile outcome achievable in us investigating.
7. Nor will we consider Mr X’s complaint about delays in handling his complaint, because it is not a good use of our resources to look at this where we are not investigating the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint, because it is unlikely we would find fault and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman