Kent County Council (19 001 961)

Category : Transport and highways > Traffic management

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 20 Jun 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to inform him of who was responsible for parking enforcement on his street. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council failing to properly explain to him how parking enforcement is carried out on the street where he lives.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
  • it is unlikely we would find fault, or
  • it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
  • it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
  • we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response and Mr X has been given the opportunity to comment on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr X lives on a street where cars are sometimes double parked which causes danger and inconvenience. He asked the Council to take action over the parked vehicles but it told him it could not enforce against this offence. The Council advised him to contact the highway authority which is the County Council if he wanted to enquire about additional parking regulations.
  2. Mr X was told by the highway authority that there are no restrictions currently on his part of the street and that a Traffic Regulation Order would only be created if there were traffic accident statistics to support one. It advised him that if vehicles are being parked on the highway and causing an obstruction the Police have powers to take action even where there are no traffic regulations in force.
  3. Mr X remains dissatisfied with the current operation of parking enforcement. However, the Council must operate within the same legislation as any other regarding parking. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings