The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s actions in response to his reports of driving and parking in a local park, and drivers parking over pedestrian areas in a local street car park. Even if there has been fault in the Council’s response and decisions here, the matters do not cause Mr X a significant personal injustice which justify us investigating.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council: is failing to stop or enforce against vehicles driving and parking in a local park; is failing to prevent other vehicles parking over pavements in a car park on street A.
Mr X says it is dangerous and not acceptable for people to park or drive in the park, or park over land meant for pedestrian use. He wants the Council to stop vehicles getting into the park, or get the police to stop them, and stop vehicles in the street A car park from parking over pedestrian land.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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: any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information from Mr X, online maps, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In response to Mr X’s various reports, the Council has investigated the vehicles entering and parking in the park, and the land uses in the separate parking area in street A. Officers have indicated any parking or driving in the park would be done so without Council permission. They say they took action to stop this practise last year, and invited Mr X to report any further instances. The Council has decided work to prevent parking over the pedestrian land in street A will not be done at this time because it is of lower priority.
I recognise Mr X is annoyed by the actions of drivers involved and by the Council not taking all the preventative or enforcement actions he wants. But even if it is fault by the Council not to have taken or be planning those actions, the Ombudsman will not investigate. This is because the matters Mr X has complained about do not cause him such a significant personal injustice to justify us using public money to investigate. Mr X’s annoyance does not amount to a sufficient injustice which warrants our further involvement.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because even if there has been fault by the Council here, the matters complained of do not cause him a significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman