London Borough of Camden (25 031 941)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 15 Jul 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council refused a pro-rata refund for a parking permit. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman. We will not investigate the Council’s complaint handling because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained the Council:
      1. refused to issue a pro-rata refund for a parking permit; and
      2. failed to consider his complaint in line with its policy including delays and an inadequate investigation.
  2. Mr X said the matter caused him frustration and financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Refused to issue a refund

  1. We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X’s V5C for his vehicle was not registered to the address in the Council’s area. When Mr X requested a pro-rata refund, the Council found the V5C was not registered at the address and therefore refused the refund in line with its terms and conditions.
  2. The Ombudsman is 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.
  3. The Council followed its policy when making the decision. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Complaint handling

  1. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures if we decide not to investigate the substantive issue. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings