Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to implement parking restrictions on the housing development where Mr X lives. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to make a Traffic Regulation Order to introduce parking restrictions for a housing development he lives on. He said the requirement for parking restrictions were a planning condition and the Council should not have taken responsibility for the roads without having the Traffic Regulation Order in place.
2. Mr X said because of the lack of parking restrictions, his service charge to live on the development includes a contribution for private parking enforcement. Mr X wants the Council to make a Traffic Regulation Order to introduce parking restrictions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant including the Council’s complaint response.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council publicly consulted about introducing parking restrictions on the housing development in 2018. It decided not to pursue restrictions based on the views of the respondents. It adopted the roads in 2019.
8. The Council followed the correct process for deciding whether to introduce traffic restrictions before adopting the roads. There was not a planning condition specifying that a TRO must be in place before adoption. The planning condition was for a long-term strategy for street parking. The District Council discharged that planning condition in 2020. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman