Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council not removing an illegally parked, abandoned car. This is because the matter complained about has not caused Mr X any significant personal injustice which is so serious that it warrants a further investigation by this office.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council not removing an illegally parked abandoned car on a road near to where he lives. Mr X says if the car was not abandoned the Council would have removed the car in order to generate income.

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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. In late 2024, Mr X complained to the Council that it had not removed an illegally parked, abandoned vehicle from a road near his home which had been there since the previous week.
9. The Council had issued a Fixed Penalty Notice but had not removed the car. Mr X complained the Council had not removed the car because it would not generate income for the Council to remove an abandoned car. He said the Council was treating non-abandoned vehicles differently to abandoned vehicles. He also complained about the Council’s response to his previous report about an abandoned vehicle in 2021.
10. In response, the Council confirmed the car had been removed. It provided Mr X with information about how it deals with abandoned vehicles and how it assesses whether a car is abandoned.
11. Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response. He says it did not respond within the promised timeframe and did not fully answer all of his questions.
12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the matter complained about has not caused Mr X any significant personal injustice which is so serious that it warrants the use of public funds to carry out an investigation further to that already carried out by the Council. We do not investigate every complaint we receive. We must focus our limited public resources on investigating those complaints where a person has suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of fault by a body in our jurisdiction. This is not the case here. The car was on a local road for a relatively short period of time and was removed prior to the completion of the Council’s complaints process. Whilst Mr X also raises complaint handling issues we do not investigate these in isolation where we are not also considering the substantive matter. This is because it is not a good use of public funds to do so.
13. We will not consider Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of an illegally parked vehicle in 2021. This lies outside our jurisdiction because it is late. The law says a complaint should be made to us within 12 months of the person affected first becoming aware of the matter. I see no good grounds to exercised discretion to consider it now.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the matter has not caused Mr X any significant personal injustice which is serious enough to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman