Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to introduce parking restrictions on Mr X’s road. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault for us to challenge the Council’s decision and had Mr X wanted to do so, it would have been reasonable for him to challenge the validity of the parking restrictions at court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council introduced parking restrictions on his road which affect residents and do not resolve parking issues. He says the Council is responsible for the issues by granting planning permission to extend two local schools and did not properly consider his suggestions for improving the situation.

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)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. We will not investigate whether the Council was at fault in granting planning permission and imposing parking restrictions prior to March 2024, which is 12 months before he complained to us. This is for the reason set out at Paragraph 5. Mr X has provided evidence to show he was in contact with the Council about these issues in 2022 and he could have complained to us about them at the time.
8. Mr X’s recent complaint relates to the parking restrictions brought in by the Council in 2024 and this complaint is within our time limit for investigation. However, while it is clear Mr X disagrees with the restrictions I have seen no basis for us to investigate them further. The Council has explained to Mr X the reasons it decided not to proceed with a resident’s parking permit scheme, which is one of Mr X’s preferred options, and has given the reasons why it proceeded with the current restrictions instead. This is a matter of professional judgement and without evidence of fault in the process we cannot question its decision.
9. Mr X believes the Council failed to properly consult residents on the parking restrictions but the Council says it took the steps required, publishing details in the local press and the London Gazette, and hand-delivering letters to residents. While Mr X says he did not receive any letters from the Council we cannot prove the Council did not send/deliver them. Mr X also has the right to challenge the validity of the Order of the Traffic Management Order which brought in the restrictions at the High Court. In the circumstances I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr X to use this process as the High Court is better placed to decide whether the Council met its legal requirements and, if not, it had the power to quash the Order. This is not an outcome we could achieve.
10. I appreciate Mr X’s frustrations about the current parking issues but we could not attribute them to any fault by the Council. Mr X has the option of applying for a dropped kerb, should he meet the criteria, and the Council has confirmed it will consider the road for its ‘school streets’ scheme, although this process is long and costly so there are no guarantees.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to challenge the validity of the Traffic Management Order at court. We cannot question the Council’s decision to implement the parking restrictions in 2024 and will not investigate any historic concerns about planning and parking decisions which led to the current parking issues complained about by Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman