Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the permits scheme for a restricted parking zone near Ms X’s home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about the Council’s requirement for residents in her street to obtain a separate permit for a School Street parking zone when they already have an exemption because they hold residents’ parking permits.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether an organisation’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)
3. 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X lives in a street which is part of a controlled parking zone. Residents pay for permits to park in the area. In 2020 the Council introduced a second ‘School Streets’ scheme which introduced restrictions on parking in the area during busy school access times. This was to reduce congestion and pollution. Initially the scheme allowed residents living within the zone to be exempt without requiring a separate permit.
7. The initial 2020 temporary Traffic Management Order was made permanent in 2022 and residents were advised at the time of introduction that after the first year of the scheme they would be required to apply for a separate permit on their own. Ms X is concerned that some residents have received penalty notices for not obtaining permits – even though they are exempt.
8. The Council told her that the schemes require separate permits because they have different requirements and enforcement and that although the Council is seeking to devise a single permit for both schemes this is not possible at present.
9. The Council made it clear when the scheme was introduced that a permit would have to be obtained by the residents and the legal order exempts permit holders specific to that the scheme. This makes penalties issued under the CPZ and the School Streets scheme separately enforceable.
10. The Ombudsman is concerned with process. We are not a court of appeal. If there has been no flaw in the process through which a decision has been taken, we have no power to challenge the merits of the decision itself.
11. Any resident who receives a penalty and wishes to challenge it can do so by way of an appeal to the London Tribunals which is an independent body dealing with challenges to parking and traffic penalties.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint about the permits scheme for a restricted parking zone near Ms X’s home. There is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman