Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about parking permits because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms Y complains the Council has increased its parking permit price from £120 to £266 because of the emissions her car produces despite her vehicle meeting ULEZ standards.
2. Ms Y says she feels overcharged.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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 Ms Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms Y is unhappy the Council has increased the cost of its parking permits, in her case from £120 a year to £266. The Council changed the cost of its parking permits in January 2025, with the charges coming into effect in February 2025. Ms Y says she feels there was a lack of consultation for the changes and feels it is just to increase revenue.
7. The Council said in its complaint response that the decision was made due to consistent polling showing residents in the area felt the reduction in air pollution was important to them. The Council explained how it had carried out surveys before bringing in the measures. It also said how the decision had been made by the Council in October 2024 to increase the charges.
8. As the Council has explained its rationale for the decision and how it made the decision with consultation, even if this was not a requirement, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigation. While Ms Y may be unhappy with the decision, the consultation was not a referendum, and the Council made the decision properly. Further the Council has made the charges in line with its policy. Consequently, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman