Bolton Metropolitan Borough Council (25 000 523)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 22 Jul 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to make a Traffic Regulation Order. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

  1. Mr X says the Council wrongly made a TRO (Traffic Regulation Order) introducing new parking controls near to his address. He wants the Council to remove these parking controls.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. The Council announced its proposal to make a TRO order that included parking controls on Mr X’s road. It carried out a public consultation on its proposal and Mr X responded. The Council considered all the consultation responses and decided to go ahead with making the TRO.
  2. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
  3. I recognise that Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s decision. However, the Council followed the correct procedure for making the TRO. We cannot question the Council’s judgement that the TRO is necessary.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings