Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of an application for a resident parking permit. This is because there is not enough evidence of significant injustice and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council would not issue him a parking permit for parking in a resident zone outside his property. He also complains about how the Council handled his complaint about the matter.

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 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complains he was not able to apply for a resident parking permit. He says the Council told him his property was not included in those eligible for a permit. He says the Council’s response to his complaint was inconsistent and contradictory.
6. Mr X recently moved to the property after it had been converted for residential use. The property does not have off-street parking. The Council said Mr X’s property was not included when the residential parking zone was introduced as it was not used for housing purposes. During the complaints process, the Council agreed to allow Mr X to apply for a permit to allow him to park in the resident parking zone.
7. Mr X had the opportunity to check if he would be allowed a parking permit prior to moving to the property but there is no evidence to show he did this even though it would have been prudent.
8. As the Council has now allowed Mr X to apply for a permit, there is not enough evidence of unremedied injustice to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman. Nor is it likely further investigation would lead to a different outcome.
9. Mr X says he faces uncertainty as the Council may refuse his application for a permit in the future. Should that be the case, Mr X should first complain to the Council and if not satisfied with its response, he can complain to the Ombudsman.
10. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint. It is not a good use of our resources to investigate how a Council has handled a complaint if the substantive matter does not fall to be investigated. That is the case here.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of significant injustice and an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman