Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council is failing in its duty to prevent illegal, dangerous and inconsiderate heavy good vehicle (HGV) parking on an industrial estate. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complained that the Council is failing in its duty to prevent illegal, dangerous and inconsiderate heavy good vehicle (HGV) parking on an industrial estate. He does not live on the estate but he told us he has to walk there regularly twice a day.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 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)

3. 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

4. I have considered the information Mr B provided, including his photographs, the Council’s parking enforcement policy and Mr B’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B has also submitted a complaint to us about the County Council which we have considered separately.
6. Mr B told us he is registered disabled. He says virtually every day he has to walk in the road of the industrial estate because of obstructions on the pavements which puts him and other pedestrians at risk. For example, he says on one occasion a van mirror hit him when he was walking in the road. One of his photographs shows two large lorries parked on the pavement, obstructing it. Another photograph shows damage caused to the pavement. While Mr B’s primary concern is safety, he is also concerned that the parking is having a detrimental effect on the area, in particular, because of the lack of sanitary facilities for drivers of the vehicles to use. He has provided evidence that complaints have also been made by others. He told us the problem is getting worse but the Council is failing to address it. Mr B says the Council’s visits to the estate have decreased.
7. Mr B has sent us a copy of a Housing of Commons Library Standard Note “Parking: pavement and on-street”. This sets out the actions local authorities may take to tackle pavement parking. But it says this has always been a difficult area and there are problems with enforcing the legal remedies which exist.
8. There are parking restrictions on the industrial estate and the Council is the body responsible for carrying out civil enforcement of those restrictions. Mr B’s view is the Council is not using its enforcement resources fairly. He contrasts the number of parking penalty charge notices the Council has issued on the industrial estate with the much higher number it has issued in a town centre. He also contrasts the levels of patrolling in the two locations. He says it seems the Council is targeting private motorists rather than HGV drivers. Mr B has complained that there are other options used by councils, such as by making by-laws, but the Council has chosen not to use them.
9. It is not the case the Council has ignored Mr B’s concerns. It accepts parking in contravention of restrictions does have an impact on other users of the highway. Mr B accepts council officers have visited the site. But he says there is a lack of enforcement and one company flouts the law daily. In effect, he says, the Council’s ineffective action allows those concerned to continue to contravene parking restrictions blatantly.
10. The Council says its officer acted when he observed fly tipping but Mr B’s complaints about the behaviour of HGV drivers would be for the police. Mr B says the problems of human and food waste left on the estate is a result of the Council’s failure to resolve the parking issue.
11. In its final response to Mr B ‘s complaint the Council said one of its officers had written and visited companies operating on the estate, including the one criticised by Mr B. Because of the company’s apparent failure to act the Council said it had reported the matter to the Office of the Traffic Commissioner. Mr B told us this has not resolved the problems this company continues to cause.
12. The Council view, which Mr B disputes, is it has received relatively few complaints about parking on the estate but it will continue to patrol the area and issue penalty charge notices. But this has not deterred drivers from parking their vehicles on the industrial estate.
13. The law provides a power for the Council to enforce against parking contraventions, rather than a duty. It does not have a duty to issue a penalty charge notice every time a member of the public reports a contravention. The Council’s view is it has taken appropriate and proportionate action where resources allow.
14. Mr B has complained about the Council’s distribution of its resources. But it is for the Council to judge how and where to allocate its resources in its own area. Councils can decide their own local priorities for the use of its parking enforcement powers. One council may reach different decisions to those reached in other local authority areas. It is not our role to say how the Council should deploy its parking enforcement officers.
15. If a council has failed to resolve a problem, this does not necessarily mean this is due to administrative fault. The Council has not chosen to do nothing. According to its records, It has taken some enforcement action by issuing just over 100 penalty charge notices in a recent six-month period. But the Council recognises its patrols and penalty charge notices have not prevented overnight HGV parking. The Council has explained it cannot force drivers to move on when they are resting. This suggests more frequent patrols and more penalty charge notices would not necessarily resolve the situation. Mr B says nothing seems to have happened in the past 12 months. We would expect a council to recognise when the action it has taken has not resolved a problem. The Council has done so in this case. It is for the Council to judge what would be the most appropriate way forward in its area. It is working with other bodies such as the County Council, so they can implement a multi-agency approach. For example, it is working with the County Council on gathering evidence in order to progress a court case. For these reasons, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

16. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman