Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to re-issue a parking permit. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s decision not to re-issue a temporary parking permit which it gave him previously so that he could park his van within a permit zone. He says he cannot park the van in his accommodation’s underground car park due to its height and he needs his van for his employment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council’s response.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X is unable to park his van in his accommodation’s underground car park due to a height restriction. The planning approval for his accommodation includes a restriction on on-street parking for residents because there is an underground car park.
6. Mr X explained the situation to the Council when he applied for a permit and it granted him an exception for a temporary 6-month permit so that he could find an alternative solution. The permit has now ended and the Council will not renew it because of the planning restriction and because it would be unfair to other non-residents around the zone who also have requested permits.
7. 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, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
8. The Council exercised discretion to give Mr X an opportunity to find alternative parking. This was not a statutory requirement and it has now decided that it must apply the parking zone restriction sand he is not eligible for a permit.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to re-issue a parking permit. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman