Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council refused to reimburse her £9.50 for unused visitor parking passes. The claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council refused her request for a refund of £9.50 for unused visitor parking vouchers.
2. Ms X said the matter caused her frustration and time and trouble.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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. We will not investigate this complaint. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
7. The primary issue is the Council’s refusal to refund £9.50 to Ms X. This is not a significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because she was not caused a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman