Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about parked cars causing an obstruction of the highway. There is not enough evidence of Mr X suffering a significant injustice and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to assess an obstruction to the highway, caused by parked cars, close to his property.
2. Mr X said this left him unable to access and exit his property and caused disruption to his daily life.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
  (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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained he is often unable to access his private parking area due to cars being parked close to its entrance.
7. The road has a single yellow line which allows unrestricted parking between 6pm and 8am. Although the cars are parked legally, Mr X said the parking can obstruct the highway.
8. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
9. Although this matter may cause inconvenience to Mr X, the available evidence does not suggest it caused him to suffer an injustice which meets the threshold for our involvement. In any case, any injustice suffered by Mr X is a result of inconsiderate motorists, not because of the actions of the Council.
10. Mr X would like the Council to complete a site-specific, reasoned and evidenced review of the location.
11. The Council told Mr X it will include the site for consideration in its next parking review later in 2026. This action appears appropriate and we would not achieve significantly more than this by investigating. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of significant injustice and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman