The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is overcharging residents who live in properties which have been divided into flats, for parking permits. This is because the Council has remedied Mr X’s injustice and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for him.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s use of RingGo to process parking permit applications. He says RingGo’s use of the Royal Mail database results in overcharging as it cannot differentiate separate residential properties contained within a building. Mr X would like the Council to use the council tax database or build a new app of its own which can distinguish between all properties. He wants it to write to everyone that may be affected to apologise and offer a refund.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council charges a set rate for the first parking permit issued for a residential property. The exact amount depends on the vehicle’s emissions. Residents may apply for second and third parking permits but these carry a surcharge.
Mr X lives in a building which has been divided into flats. He says he was overcharged for his parking permit because the occupant of another flat had already received a permit. He therefore complained to the Council.
The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint. It explained it is happy to refund any resident that may have been overcharged and its Stage 2 complaint confirmed it has given Mr X his parking permit for free. It also says it has updated its system to include Mr X’s address as a separate property so he should not experience the issue again.
The Council has explained the reasons it uses the RingGo service and that it could not provide access to the council tax database due to data protection issues. It is not for us to say it should find an alternative service provider or develop its own app and we could not say it must provide access to the council tax database against its own judgement. We could not therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X by investigating the matter further.
The current permit costs are set out on the Council’s website and if any resident believes they have been overcharged they may contact the Council to ask for a refund.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman