Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to reports of parking contraventions. This is because; there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, and we could not add to any previous investigation, therefore further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained to the Council about its failure to take sufficient enforcement action against repeated parking violations on her estate, including a parking officer’s misconduct in overlooking and supporting parking breaches. Ms X also complained about the Council’s poor record keeping on enforcement.
2. Ms X says the issues cause obstructions and affects her ability to park near her home as a disabled resident.

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
• 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 Ms X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X complained to the Council about a lack of enforcement and the conduct of a parking enforcement officer whom she says was overlooking parking violations. The Council spoke to the parking officer about Ms X’s complaint. They denied deliberately overlooking contraventions. The Council also said it has regular patrols in the area and several PCNs had been issued nearby. It did however find its record keeping of its enforcement actions was poor.
7. The Council apologised to Ms X for the difficulties she had experienced. The Council offered targeted enforcement for the estate and asked the parking department to consider any relevant service improvements. It offered more selective enforcement, but said this would only be possible if Ms X provided peak timings of contraventions.
8. As Ms X was unhappy with the Council’s response, she approached us.
9. The Council said in its complaint response it has regular patrols in the area and several PCNs had been issued near to where Ms X lives. It also spoke to the officer involved about the alleged misconduct. The officer denied misconduct and without further evidence, the Council could not find fault. We could not add to the previous investigation by the Council, where there is insufficient evidence to be able to reach a conclusion.
10. Ms X also raised concerns about a specific vehicle, but due to data protection, the Council could not to provide specific information about the individual vehicle. It has however responded to calls from Ms X about problem parking, often on the same day, but when the Council arrived, the vehicles were not always present. As these are the actions we would expect the Council to take, if not beyond this, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
11. The Council found its record keeping of its enforcement actions was poor. The Council apologised to Ms X and asked the parking department to consider any relevant service improvements.
12. As the Council has properly considered and investigated the complaint, it is unlikely the Ombudsman would be able to add to the original investigation. Further, the Council has offered a proportionate and appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by its fault. Consequently, it is unlikely further consideration of this complaint would lead to a different outcome. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint t there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, and we could not add to any previous investigation, therefore further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman