Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about insufficient on-street parking and the Council’s refusal to allow access to her driveway. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains there is insufficient parking outside her property. She says the Council has refused to allow access to her driveway.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X says there is insufficient parking in her street. She says the Council has refused to allow access to her driveway. She submitted a complaint to the Council.
7. The Council considered her complaint. It said on-street parking is available on a first come first served basis and it has no duty to provide off-street parking to residents. The Council explained it could not agree a dropped kerb because Miss X did not have the necessary permission to cross private land to her driveway.
8. I have not seen enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify investigating. It explained why it cannot provide off street parking or approve a dropped kerb to allow access to her driveway.
9. We are not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong.
10. Miss X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. As we are not considering the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public resources to consider how the Council responded to Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman