Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council is failing in its duty to prevent the illegal, dangerous and inconsiderate parking of trailers 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 the illegal, dangerous and inconsiderate parking of trailers on an industrial estate. He told us he has to walk on the estate 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 and his comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B has also submitted a complaint to us about the Borough Council which we will consider 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. While his primary concern is safety, he is also concerned that the parking is having a detrimental effect on the area. He has provided evidence that complaints have also been made by others.
7. In his complaint to the Council Mr B listed the legislation available to the relevant authorities to enable them to take enforcement action. The police are the enforcement body for criminal road traffic offences. But the Highways Act 1980 gives the Council some enforcement powers. Mr B says the Council has allowed one company in particular to flout the law. He has pointed out to the Council that other highway authorities have taken action to address similar problems.
8. Mr B says he has on one occasion seen the notices the Council served on trailers under section 143 of the Highways Act 1980. But he says he has seen the same trailers illegally parked on yellow lines and on pavements on many other occasions so they Council’s action appears to have been pointless. He complained that the yellow lines had become worn on part of the estate, preventing the Borough Council from issuing penalty charge notices.
9. When the Council responded to Mr B’s complaint it said section 143 of the Highways Act required a notice period. The Council said most trailers were left for a temporary period (Mr B says this is up to four days at a time), so its use of section 143 powers had not proved a successful deterrent. Mr B told us he has seen section 143 notices on trailers which were still there three days later.
10. The Council told Mr B it was working with the Borough Council to collect evidence with a view to taking a case to court under section 137 of the Highways Act 1980. If a person is found guilty of an offence under this section, they become liable to a fine. But the Council says this process takes several months. The Council told Mr B it had attempted to re-paint the yellow lines but the parked vehicles had prevented the work. In its April 2019 final complaint response the Council said it had completed the re-painting of yellow lines.
11. The Council says it tries to avoid installing bollards but it would review the situation on the industrial estate to see if there are strategic places it could place them. Mr B has provided a photograph of bollards the Council has installed which are on the verge of a bend in the road. He says the Council is prepared to install them in some places but not others. Mr B’s view is the Council’s reasons for not installing more do not stand up. Our role is to look at the Council’s administrative action. We are not an appeal body with powers to overrule the Council’s decisions and substitute our own. The Council has agreed to review the situation on the industrial estate. Mr B’s evidence shows the Council is prepared to install bollards in some locations. It is for the Council’s officers to judge if they can justify the installation of additional bollards.
12. The Highways Act 1980 allows the Council to take action regarding the trailer parking. It is not the case the Council has ignored Mr B’s concerns. Mr B has pointed out measures other council have taken but it is for the Council to judge which might be the most effective way to address the situation on the industrial estate and its road safety duties. The Council has used its powers under section 143 Highways Act 1980 but this has not prevented the problems Mr B has reported. The Council has not let the matter drop, however. It has started work on preparing the evidence for a court case. There is insufficient evidence of fault to date in the way the Council has responded to Mr B’s concerns.

Back to top

Final decision

13. 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