Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about road markings. This is because the complaint is late and the matter does not cause Mrs X significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the road layout/road markings by a car park she uses regularly. She is concerned it is unsafe.

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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I reviewed Mrs X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Mrs X and discussed the case with her.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mrs X regularly uses a private (non-council) car park accessed off a busy road. The road has a bus lane which motorists must cross to get to the car park, and the access is marked by a short broken white line which begins approximately five metres before the turning.
8. The Council has recently begun CCTV enforcement of the bus lane, meaning that vehicles which enter/drive in the bus lane may be issued a penalty charge notice (PCN), but Mrs X says she is not complaining about this. She complains the broken white line is not long enough to safely allow cars to cross the bus lane and enter the car park. She would like the Council to lengthen the broken white line and put up additional signs to warn motorists about the access.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The Council implemented the road layout in this area more than 10 years ago and any complaint about it is therefore late. The Council has only recently begun enforcement of the bus lane but if Mrs X or any other motorist are issued PCNs for using the bus lane incorrectly it would be reasonable for them to appeal. The Council confirms motorists using the bus lane to access the car park should not be penalised unless they enter it too early and if there is any dispute over this is more suitable for consideration under the appeals process.
10. Mrs X is concerned the markings are unsafe and will cause accidents but the Council has confirmed it is not aware of any issues at this location in the 10+ years since the road layout was first implemented. I do not therefore consider Mrs X’s concerns about safety are a significant enough injustice to warrant exercising the Ombudsman’s discretion to investigate this late complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and the issue does not cause Mrs X significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman