Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a pavement parking issue. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr D complains the Council is not taking action to tackle the persistent problem of vehicles being parked on pavements on the roads near his home. Mr D says this issue creates a safety risk for pedestrians particularly people using wheelchairs and pushchairs. Mr D would like the Council to conduct an urgent safety assessment and put in place immediate parking restrictions to allow the Council to take enforcement action against motorists.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr D and the Council. I have also viewed the area on Google maps and Streetview.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council has explained that there are no parking restrictions on the roads Mr D complains about. This means the Police is responsible for enforcing against obstructive parking.
6. The Council has logged Mr D’s request for a Traffic Regulation Order for double yellow lines in this area, which would allow the Council to take enforcement action. The Council has explained there is a high demand for Traffic Regulation Orders across the city.
7. And, while the Council will consider Mr D’s request, such schemes generally require support from local residents and can take 18 to 36 months to be implemented once agreed.
8. The Council has also explained that the government is in the process of giving greater powers to councils to tackle pavement parking and this is a matter the Council is closely monitoring.
9. The information indicates the Council has taken Mr D’s concerns seriously and has explained its approach to this issue. I have not seen any information to indicate the Council’s assessment of this issue has been affected by fault. And, Mr D can include his concerns - that the lack of parking restrictions in this area breaches various legal duties - as part of his request for a Traffic Regulation Order.
10. The Council is also entitled to take into account the government’s plans to give councils greater powers to tackle pavement parking. This is a material consideration which is likely to affect how the Council tackles pavement parking not just in Mr D’s area but across the city.
11. So, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman