Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled Mr X’s application for a resident’s parking permit. This is because we have decided any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that the Council failed properly to apply the application procedure to his perking permit renewal. He says that this has caused him injustice because of uncertainty about future renewals of his permit. He believes the Council unreasonable required proof of ownership of his vehicle when he submitted a new application following a change of address.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. People may complain to us about injustice caused by:
• ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ by a public organisation we could investigate; or
• the actions of an organisation in connection with privately arranged adult social care.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1) or section 34C(1)(a)).

3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), or section 34B(8)).
4. We will not normally investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), or section 34B(8)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The law means we can choose only to investigate a complaint where the person has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the body complained about. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
8. Mr X had previous permits renewed but the Council noted that on his latest application he had changed address. This required a new application to be submitted. Mr X had difficulty proving ownership of the vehicle due to the finance arrangements with the finance company and lack of a copy of the registration document.
9. The Council told Mr X that he should not have had his previous permits renewed when his address had changed but he had used them as valid so he would not receive a refund. It issued a temporary permit until Mr X could provide the required documents and, after some delay by the lease company it provided a new permit on receipt of the documents.
10. Mr X was told that his permit will renew in future but if he changes address again he will need to complete a new application with the correct evidence.
11. I recognise the circumstances of X’s complaint have affected them, but this is not significant enough to warrant us investigating. The Council has explained how his permits will be dealt with in future.
12. We will not investigate the way the Council handled the complaint and correspondence here because we are satisfied it did not cause enough separate injustice to warrant it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman