Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to issue Miss X a parking permit. It is unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Miss X.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council refused to issue her a parking permit to allow her to park near her property. Miss X had previously purchased parking permits over several years, but the Council says it issued these permits in error. She would like the Council to reconsider its decision or refund her for the previous parking permits it says it issued in error.
2. Miss X says the Council’s refusal to issue her a permit has caused distress and financial hardship.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 Miss X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. As part of the planning permission for Miss X’s property the Council agreed a restriction with the developer on the entitlement of any future occupants to a parking permit. This means that while she lives in an area where residents would ordinarily be able to purchase a parking permit, she is not entitled to one. The Council’s decision is in-line with this restriction and it is therefore unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision to refuse Miss X’s application.
7. While Miss X has previously purchased parking permits from the Council, the exclusion has always applied to residents of the development. The Council therefore accepts it made an error in issuing parking permits to her previously, and to the residents of the same development. The Council apologised for the error, which is a suitable remedy, and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Miss X.
8. The Council’s historic error in issuing permits to those who are not eligible benefitted Miss X and caused no injustice. Therefore, a refund of the cost of those permits is not appropriate.
9. The Council says it will apply the same approach to Miss X’s neighbours and phase out the issue of parking permits to residents of the development. In the meantime, it is not an injustice to Miss X that some of her neighbours may still hold parking permits that allow them to park nearby.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation is unlikely to achieve any worthwhile outcome for Miss X. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to refuse Miss X’s application and the fact it has issued Miss X parking permits in the past does not cause her significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman