Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the introduction of parking charges. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council used misleading questions when it sought the opinion of residents on local parking restrictions. He said the Council failed to respond to his complaint about the matter. Mr X wants an apology from the Council and a reduction on his council tax.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

• 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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council for the following reasons.
• We will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by an organisation. There is nothing to suggest Mr X has suffered a significant injustice by the introduction of the parking restrictions.
• The Council’s response set out the period of consultation, the purpose of the questionnaire and the responses it received. It addressed Mr X’s concerns about questions being misleading. Although Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s explanation, we could not add to the Council’s response.
• Mr X wants a reduction in his council tax for how the Council has dealt with his complaint. That is not an outcome the Ombudsman can achieve. There was a delay in the Council providing a substantive response to the complaint. It apologised for that. That remedies any injustice caused. Further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman