Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a resident’s parking scheme. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to properly investigate concerns about permit misuse and enforcement within a resident’s parking scheme.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X says she has a resident parking permit but cannot park near her property because of enforcement failures and misuse of the scheme. She says the Council wrongly considered her complaint as general parking availability.
8. The Council considered Miss X’s complaint. It reviewed her concerns about enforcement, permit use, parking availability and safety. It explained that parking schemes do not guarantee a parking space and enforcement activity was consistent with its policies and available resources. It also explained that permit allocations were in allowed limits, shared her safety concerns with the Neighbourhood Police Team and said the area would be included in a future review of the parking scheme.
9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. The evidence shows the Council considered Miss X’s concerns about the resident’s parking scheme. It considered issues including enforcement, permit eligibility, parking pressures and safety. It provided detailed responses. I am satisfied the Council considered Miss X’s complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation.
10. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at the Council’s decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes it followed to make its decision. If, as here, we see no sign of fault in the way it made its decision we cannot question whether it is right or wrong, even though Miss X disagrees with it.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman