Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to reports of parking obstructions outside his home. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to justify an investigation. In addition, the Council has already considered the concerns raised and taken appropriate action within its powers. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to adequately address concerns about a vehicle which was repeatedly parking on a single yellow line and obstructing a dropped kerb outside his property.
2. Mr X said the obstruction adversely affected his health, wellbeing, mobility and ability to access his property. He considered the Council had failed to take appropriate enforcement action despite being made aware of the issue.
3. Mr X wanted the Council to:
• acknowledge fault, apologise and pay him compensation;
• implement and enforce further measures to prevent further obstruction; and
• make service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X reported that a vehicle was repeatedly parking in contravention of parking restrictions and obstructing a dropped kerb outside his property. He said this impacted his mobility and wellbeing and restricted access to his home.
8. Mr X also provided photographic evidence which he said showed a Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) had failed to take enforcement action against the vehicle in question.
9. The evidence available shows that, once aware of Mr X’s concerns, the Council took a number of steps to address the issues raised. These included:
• arranging increased patrols in Mr X’s area;
• undertaking targeted enforcement action in relation to the reported vehicle;
• investigating the concerns raised about the conduct of the CEO;
• prioritising remedial works to faded road markings to ensure parking restrictions could be enforced and Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) lawfully issued where appropriate;
• considering whether stronger parking restrictions, including double yellow lines, should be introduced; and
• providing further training to relevant enforcement staff.
10. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body and cannot require a council to achieve a particular enforcement outcome. Our role is to consider whether the Council acted with administrative fault in the way it considered and responded to concerns brought to its attention.
11. In this case, the evidence indicated the Council considered Mr X’s reports, investigated the matters and took reasonable and proportionate action within the scope of its powers. While Mr X remains dissatisfied with the outcome and considers further action should have been taken, disagreement with the Council’s decision does not, by itself, indicate fault.
12. Given the action already taken by the Council, there is insufficient evidence of fault to justify an investigation. It is also unlikely that an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve a different or more meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant further investigation, and any investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to add to the work already undertaken by the Council or achieve a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman