Summary: Dr Y complains about the Council’s decision to paint double yellow lines on the road outside a property he owns. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Dr Y complains the Council has unfairly installed double yellow lines in front of a property he owns. He says this prevents tenants parking outside the house, makes it more difficult to let and affects the value.
2. He wants the lines removed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

4. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Dr Y and the Council, including his complaints and the Council’s responses.

Back to top

What I found

6. Dr Y says the Council did not consult him before it decided to paint double yellow lines outside a house he owns.
7. The Council says the lines are part of wider traffic restrictions implemented through a Traffic Regulation Order (TRO). The parish council and a ward councillor requested the lines because of problems with double parking outside the property. And it sent consultation letters to all owner/occupiers, including Dr Y’s address.
8. Dr Y says the Council’s letter did not include enough details about the impact of the proposals on the property. Because of this, the tenants did not pass the letters on either to him or the letting agent. He says they should have contacted him or the letter agent directly and they would have resolved the problem.
9. The Council confirms the proposed restrictions were also publicised by:
• displaying information at the local library and Council offices
• via the consultation system on its website
• a notice in the local newspaper
• site notices

After the consultation period the matter was considered at parish meetings. Following this the Council implemented the TRO.

Assessment

10. The Ombudsman is not an appeals body, and we have no powers to say what parking controls councils should impose. These are decisions for officers and elected members. The Ombudsman can only consider a Council’s decision-making process.
11. I understand Dr Y believes the Council should have written to him personally at his own home address or directly to the letting agent, to ensure the information got to him. But there is no requirement on the Council to do this. He also complains the Council has not accepted any points he has made in the case for removing the lines outside his property. But I have not seen any evidence of fault in how the Council carried out its consultation. There is no fault or flaw in how the council has made the decision to introduce the parking scheme, we cannot question the merits of the decision itself.

Back to top

Final decision

12. Subject to any comments that Dr Y might make, my view is the Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint because:
• we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council made the decision to paint double yellow lines outside his home
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman