The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has not done enough to stop the complainant’s driveway being blocked. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has responded to the matter.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council has not done enough to stop his driveway being blocked and the residents’ car park being used incorrectly. He says it has affected his home life, family life, work life and relationships, and his mental health has declined. Mr X thinks the parking area/provision needs to be expanded, with more restrictions put in place, and regular visits from parking enforcement officers.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) With regard to the first bullet point above, we can consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended).
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included some of their complaint correspondence.
I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I appreciate it is very inconvenient and stressful for Mr X when his driveway is blocked, and he thinks the Council should do more to address the problem.
But the Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it is wrong, or tell the Council how to operate its services. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It has considered his complaint, explained the reasons for its decisions/position, and advised how to contact its parking enforcement team if his driveway is fully obstructed. Although I acknowledge Mr X wants the Council to do more, it is for the Council to decide how to allocate its limited resources and what actions it will take. We could not require the Council to implement parking restrictions or increase parking provision nearby.
I have also seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council decided to impose contact restrictions on Mr X’s communications about this issue, so we will not investigate that either.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council has responded to the matter.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman