Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to charge Mr X for additional road markings outside his property. Any complaint about the Traffic Regulation Order which implemented the layout of the parking bays is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in its decision to charge him for additional markings.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to charge him to install additional road markings to deter motorists from parking across his driveway. He says the current parking bay markings implemented by the Council in the 1990’s cause confusion for motorists and could result in them receiving a parking fine. He wants the Council to install the additional road markings without charge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We investigate 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 continue 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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Traffic Regulation Order (TRO) implementing the layout of the parking bays in Mr X’s road was approved by the Council in the early 1990’s. Mr X states he objected as part of the consultation process at the time.
7. Any complaint about the TRO consultation process or the decision to approve the current layout is late and so we cannot investigate this. If Mr X wanted to complain about this decision, there is no good reason why he could not have complained to us earlier, following the TRO’s approval in the 1990’s.
8. Mr X also complains about the Council’s recent decision that it will charge him to install additional H-bar markings across his driveway. I have reviewed the Council’s charging policy and the charges quoted to Mr X are in line with its policy. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to charge Mr X to warrant further investigation.
9. Any parking fines incurred by motorists parking in Mr X’s road are for the motorist to challenge, if they wish to do so. This does not cause Mr X a significant injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any complaint about the layout of parking bay markings is late and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to charge him to install additional road makings outside his property.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman