Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his concerns about parking on his street. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to deal with his concerns about parking on his street. He says he provided the Council with evidence of vehicles obstructing driveways and the highway. Mr X says the Council did not carry out a meaningful investigation before dismissing his complaint.
2. Mr X says these parking issues mean he is often unable to park near his home and have made it more difficult for him to access and use his driveway. He wants the Council to review the issues he has raised and carry out a proper assessment.

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))
4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council reviewed the evidence Mr X provided including video footage. It explained it does not have legal powers to take enforcement action or issue Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) against vehicles that are parked lawfully, regardless of the space they occupy. The Council also told Mr X it had directed officers to carry out regular patrols in the area and provided him with a direct contact number to report any parking contraventions.
8. The Council considered possible measures to manage parking in the area, including installing more double yellow lines. However, it considered this could move the parking issues on to nearby roads. The Council advised Mr X that a Controlled Parking Zone (CPZ) would be the most suitable alternative for managing parking in the area. It explained its policy requires evidence of wider local community support, usually through a petition from residents, before it can consider introducing a CPZ.
9. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision because someone disagrees with it. Instead, we consider whether the organisation followed the correct process in reaching its decision. Where there is no evidence of fault in that process, we cannot question the merits of the decision itself. The evidence available shows the Council considered the information Mr X provided, reviewed his concerns and explained the reasons for its conclusions. While Mr X disagrees with the outcome, there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify an investigation.
10. Mr X also complained about vehicles blocking access to his driveway. While councils can take enforcement action against vehicles parked across a dropped kerb, they are not legally required to provide a continuous or immediate on-demand enforcement service for private driveways. Also, general obstruction on the public highway remains a matter for the police. I acknowledge Mr X's frustration about parking in the area. However, residents do not have a legal right to park on the public highway outside or near their homes.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making process to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman