The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council will not provide parking for the complainant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision that he cannot have a driveway. He also complains the Council will not provide alternate parking. Mr X wants the Council to remove some grass so he can have a drive.
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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
Mr X asked the Council for permission to build a driveway. He explained there are parking problems in his street and he finds it hard to park. He said his car has been damaged and is sometimes blocked in. He also wants the potential to have an electric car. Mr X has a disability and says he cannot walk far without pain.
The Council said he cannot have a drive because it would involve the loss of green amenity space near his home. The Council said such space is of value to the wider community and for biodiversity. It explained residents do not have the right to park close to their homes and it has no duty to provide parking spaces. It also explained that it is developing an electric car charging strategy and it is not responsible for obstructive parking or any damage that has been caused to his car. The Council said it would explore if the existing parking spaces could be marked out but also said it would be subject to consultation. The Council invited Mr X to apply for a disabled parking space but said it would not be for his exclusive use and, as it would only be advisory, it may not help.
Mr X disagrees with the response. He wants the Council to remove a small area of grass so he can have a drive. He also says the Council has dismissed his other suggestions.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council responded appropriately by explaining why it will not agree to his request and by responding to his other suggestions. It correctly explained that it is not under any duty to provide parking and people have no right to park outside their home. Mr X disagrees with the response but that disagreement does not mean the Council has done anything wrong.
We do not act an appeal body and we cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision someone disagree with. There is no fault in the way the Council responded and no reason to start an investigation. In addition, we have no power to tell the Council it must provide parking for Mr X.
Final decision
We will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman