Summary: We will not investigate most of Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to extend a Controlled Parking Zone because there is insufficient evidence of fault. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s complaint handling in 2024 because it is late. We will not investigate the Council’s 2026 complaint handling because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council:
1. refused her request to extend a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) to include her road;
2. failed to respond to her complaint in 2024; and
3. failed to address her complaint in 2026 fully, including losing correspondence.
2. Ms X said the matter caused her distress and uncertainty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

Request for a Controlled Parking Zone

8. We will not investigate this complaint. 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.
9. In its final complaint response, the Council explained it considered Ms X’s request to extend the CPZ but decided it would not do so at this time because the criteria to proceed were not met.
10. There is insufficient evidence in the Council’s decision-making to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

2024 Complaint

11. Ms X said the Council failed to respond to a complaint she submitted in July 2024. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman in May 2026. This complaint is therefore late.
12. I have seen no good reasons Ms X could not have complained to the Ombudsman sooner about this issue. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

2026 Complaint handling

13. 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

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman