Summary: We upheld Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to address his safety concerns. The Council has agreed to apologise and provide him with an explanation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to address his safety concerns regarding regular obstruction of his driveway from vehicles parked across or level with his gates. He also says the Council has failed to follow its complaints process. Mr X says this has caused him significant distress. He wants an apology, investigation and compensation.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

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. If we investigate this complaint, we would likely find fault because:
• Mr X was told by his councillor the Council’s parking service had agreed to put some parking restrictions in place and asked him to sign a consent form agreeing to the work;
• Mr X sent the consent form and chased the Council for a response. He complained to the Council;
• the Council initially agreed to provide Mr X with an update in February 2026. But no further update or response was provided.
7. The Council’s failure to respond to Mr X was fault. We asked the Council to apologise and explain what had happened. The Council has now done this, and I am satisfied this is a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X.
8. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome as the Council told us the markings Mr X referred to are advisory only. They are not enforceable in themselves, and Mr X would have to pay if he wanted the Council to install them. The Council also said there is no current traffic regulation order in place which would allow it to take enforcement action.

Back to top

Agreed action

9. Within four weeks of our final decision the Council agreed to write to Mr X and apologise and provide him with an explanation. This has been provided.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We upheld Mr X’s complaint because the Council agreed to resolve the complaint early by providing a suitable remedy for the injustice caused to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman