The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing Mr X with a warning notice for parking on yellow lines which he says are not enforceable. There is insufficient evidence of any significant personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complained about being issued with a warning notice by a parking enforcement officer for parking ion double yellow lines at a leisure centre. He says the lines are not enforceable and the officer’s actions were not valid.
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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or 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 provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X received a warning notice for parking on double yellow lines at a council-owned leisure centre instead of a designated parking space. He says that he believes the lines are not enforceable because they are on a private access road owned by the Council. He says the Council would have issued a parking penalty if he had broken enforceable regulations.
The Council told Mr X that the access road is enforceable and that if he is issued with a penalty notice for any future incident, he would be able to challenge the validity of them by appealing to the Adjudicator at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal which is the body who deals with parking appeals.
Whether the yellow lines are enforceable depends on whether they were incorporated in the adoption agreement when the site was constructed or any subsequent Traffic Regulation order. The Tribunal would seek this information if it received an appeal about a related penalty.
Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
In this case Mr X only received a warning notice and not a financial penalty. This is insufficient personal injustice to warrant an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing Mr X with a warning notice for parking on yellow lines which he says are not enforceable. There is insufficient evidence of any significant personal injustice which would warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman