Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to consult with him or a family member, Mrs Y, before it installed an EV charging point on a lamppost on the public highway outside their home. This is because neither Mr X or Mrs Y was caused a significant injustice for part of the complaint, and there is insufficient evidence of fault for the remainder.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on his own behalf and on behalf of a family member, Mrs Y. Mr X complained the Council failed to consult them about an electric charging point it installed in a lamppost on the public highway outside their home.
2. Mr X said the matter caused him and Mrs Y 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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

4. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X contacted the Council in response to a letter informing him it intended to install an EV charging point on a lamppost on the public highway outside his home. Mr X told the Council he objected to the installation. He said the Council told him it would contact him again to discuss the matter, but it did not.
8. The Council later installed the EV charging point outside Mr X’s house. Mr X complained to the Council and explained the installation negatively affects his household because a family member has a blue badge and parking on the road is difficult. He said the family member was eligible for a disabled parking bay, but they had not applied for one to save the Council money.

Analysis

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has an overarching scheme to install EV charging posts in lampposts across the area. This policy was approved by councillors.
10. The consequence of Mr X’s complaint (that the Council failed to consult with him) is that the EV charging point is installed outside his house against his wishes. Mr X said the installation means he may have members of the public knocking on his door and asking him to move his car to access the charging point. However, this is speculative. It is not a significant enough injustice to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman, and so we will not investigate this complaint.
11. Mr X also explained about the impact on Mrs Y including difficulties relating to parking, the fact that Mrs Y has a blue bade, and that they meet the criteria for a disabled parking bay.
12. However, there is currently no disabled parking bay in place. Parking on the public highway is open to all members of the public unless there are restrictions in place. It is open to Mr X or Mrs Y to apply to the Council for a disabled parking bay if they believe it is necessary.
13. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault because there is currently no disabled parking bay in situ.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s and Mrs Y’s complaint because they have not been caused a significant injustice for part of the complaint, and there is insufficient evidence of fault for the remainder.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman