Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s approach to traffic management and its decisions to introduce Traffic Regulation Orders. This is because parts of the complaint are late and it is unlikely that we will find fault with the Council.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that a boroughwide Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) established in 2023 with restrictions applied from August 2024 has led to dangerous parking on her street, which was not affected by the TRO.
2. Miss X is also concerned that proposed restrictions on a nearby street may further compound the current situation. She says the Council should have an action plan to manage parking issues on her road.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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

6. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss X says a TRO led to an increase in parking on her street. The TRO came into force in August 2024. Miss X complained to the Council in June 2025 and to the Ombudsman in November 2025.
9. Miss X could have complained once the TRO came into force over 12 months ago, so the restriction in paragraph 4 prevents us from investigating. I see no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate this matter now.
10. Miss X also complained about the potential impact of proposed TRO restrictions on nearby streets. At the time of complaining to the Ombudsman, no decision had been made. If the TRO has now been approved and Miss X feels it has impacted parking on her street, she can make a new separate complaint to the Council and return to the Ombudsman if she is unhappy with its response.
11. Miss X also complained the Council should have an action plan to manage traffic on her street. She said the methods available to raise concerns were unsuitable, response times were too long and that direct communication and interaction were required.
12. The Council provided a detailed explanation of its criteria, process and timings for monitoring traffic and making TRO decisions in its complaint responses. The Council also visited the road where Miss X lives and explained why it does not consider restrictions necessary. It said it will continue to monitor the situation.
13. The Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to establish processes and make decisions. The Ombudsman cannot question this unless it was tainted by fault. I am satisfied the Council has properly established and followed its processes in managing traffic and considered Miss X’s concerns about parking near her home, it is unlikely that we will find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because parts are late and it is unlikely that we will find faut with the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman