Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about problems the complainant had renewing his parking permit. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains it took the Council 26 days to renew his parking permit. He spent a lot of time trying to complete the application and the delay caused stress and anxiety. Mr X wants compensation.

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 an investigation if we believe the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered information on the Council’s website. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Parking permits

4. The Council tries to verify permit applications automatically. If this is not possible the applicant has 30 days to supply additional information. The website explains that the applicant can continue to park, during those 30 days, provided payment has been made for the permit.

What happened

5. Mr X applied to renew his permit on 31 May. He paid for the permit and applied for visitor permits. He received the visitor permits but, despite making many calls to the Council, did not get the main permit.
6. Mr X complained about not getting the permit. The Council responded by explaining it had a new IT system which was experiencing some teething problems. It explained the vouchers were issued on 1 June. The reply did not comment on the main issue about the permit.
7. Mr X escalated his complaint. By this time the Council had approved the permit on 25 June. In response to the complaint, the Council explained that it had been unable to verify the application automatically and Mr X had been asked to supply documents. It recognised Mr X had had trouble uploading documents. It said one factor may have been that he was trying to upload address details when the Council needed information about the car. As an alternative, it suggested he email the documents. It said the application had been approved and an officer had called him to help. It said the application was approved within the 30 day verification window.
8. Mr X is dissatisfied with the reply. He says the Council has ignored the half a day he had to spend trying to renew the permit. He denies an officer called him. He says systems should be checked before being introduced. He says he was caused stress and sleepless nights for which he should be compensated.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. I appreciate the process did not go smoothly and Mr X had difficulty uploading documents. I agree the stage one reply did not address the central issue and I note Mr X says nobody called to help. However, I also note that the website explains that the permit is live during the 30 days so Mr X had information to be aware he would not be fined. In addition, the Council processed the application within the stated time frame and Mr X did not incur a financial loss. I understand Mr X found the process worrying and time-consuming but there is not enough injustice to require an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman