Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to provide him with additional daily visitor parking permits. There is insufficient evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council rejected his request for additional daily visitor parking permits while he has renovation work conducted at his property. Mr X said the Council failed to exercise its discretion when making the decision.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him frustration and distress.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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.
7. The Council considered Mr X’s request for additional visitor permits. It decided not to provide additional permits. It considered its discretion but decided not to exercise it. There is insufficient evidence of fault, and so we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman