Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Council decision that it will not renew his parking permit. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council told him he was eligible for a parking permit before he purchased his flat, but it has since refused to renew his permit. He says this has caused distress, inconvenience and affected the value of his property. He wants the Council to renew his parking permit.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. In its complaint response, the Council said it has had a policy in place since 2001 not to issue parking permits to properties in new, larger residential developments. It said when it granted Mr X a parking permit in 2023, this was due to an error within its permit system, and it should not have issued him the permit. It said its system was updated during 2024 and the error corrected, so when Mr X applied to renew his permit, his application was correctly refused.
7. It accepted it had wrongly issued him a permit in 2023. It apologised to him for any distress and inconvenience caused by this. It said as his property was part of an excluded development, he was not eligible for a parking permit and so the decision not to renew his permit was correct. It said his solicitor should have relayed the excluded status of his property during the conveyancing process. It said to prevent recurrence of a similar situation going forward, it would act to ensure its system was promptly updated with excluded developments.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has explained to Mr X how the situation occurred why it will not renew his parking permit. Although I accept the situation is likely to have caused Mr X frustration and distress, the Council has apologised to him, which is an appropriate remedy. Its decision not to renew his permit appears in line with its policy. We will not investigate as it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome.
9. We cannot determine liability claims, nor can we award compensation. If Mr X considers the Council liable for a reduction in his property’s value, it is reasonable for him to pursue this matter through the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or reach a different outcome. If Mr X considers the Council liable for a reduction in his property’s value, he can pursue this through the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman