Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information the Council provided to Mr X about his parking provision. This is because the Council has already provided a proportionate remedy to address the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that when he moved into his new home the Council gave him unclear information about where he could park which led to him being issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). Mr X also complains about the Council’s complaint handling.
2. Mr X says the Council has caused him distress and exacerbated mental health conditions he already suffered with. He is seeking an increased financial remedy.

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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X moved to a new home and says there was some misunderstandings as to where he could park. He says he initially parked on the street and received several PCNs in a short period.
8. The Council told Mr X which bay he could park in but made a mistake on its system. This error led the Council to issue a further PCN when Mr X was parked in his correct parking bay.
9. The Council accepted its mistake and cancelled the parking charge. It has also offered £250 to Mr X in recognition of the injustice its error caused.
10. Mr X has said the initial parking charges he received were due to his misunderstanding of where he could park.
11. The Council has not charged him for the ticket which was issued because of the Council’s error.
12. The Ombudsman does not make recommendations of compensation. Where a financial remedy is recommended, this is as a token of recognition the Council has caused an injustice.
13. I am satisfied the Council has offered a proportionate remedy and as the issue is not ongoing, I do not consider we would achieve a worthwhile outcome by investigating Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has provided a proportionate remedy for the injustice it caused him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman