Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the Council’s failure to remove promptly an advisory white line. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms B, complained about the Council’s failure to remove promptly an advisory white line even though it has accepted the length of the line is excessive.

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 we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, 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 Ms B provided and relevant cabinet member papers the Council has published on-line. Ms B has had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms B told us she complained about the extent of the white line after the Council originally did the work but it did not do anything. She has pursued the issue again recently because of the increase of cars in the area. If the Council shortened the length of the line, this should provide additional on-street parking near her home. People can park on the line because its status is advisory but Ms B says her neighbours make her life difficult when she parks there. She told us this has affected her health.
6. During 2020 the Council considered the parking problems in the area. It decided to defer the installation of waiting restrictions pending the outcome of a review. In this case the Council has decided it will not amend the white line until the yellow line proposals are resolved. That is because it says the outcome of the yellow line proposals will have an impact on the white line issue. The Council’s view is the white and yellow line issues are linked but Ms B disagrees. She told us the white line was installed independently of any yellow line proposals (which have arisen some years later) so could and should be removed independently. She said it could take a long time to resolve the yellow line issue so it is unfair to keep her waiting. She has also criticised the way the review is to be conducted.
7. The Council is not responsible for the behaviour of local residents but Ms B told us her health condition has been exacerbated by the Council’s refusal to do anything even though it has admitted the length of the line is excessive.
8. While Ms B has put forward reasons why the Council should take action promptly and independently of any decision on waiting restrictions, it was ultimately for the Council to decide how it would deal with parking issues in the area. Our role is to consider the way a council reached its decision. We are not an appeal body with powers to overturn a council decision and substitute our own decision. In this case the Council has considered relevant matters including the issues Ms B raised in her complaint. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman