Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Cambridge City Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-011-547 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 18 November 2025

View Cambridge University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to refund Mr X’s payment for parking following the loss of his parking ticket. This is because the injustice Mr X claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

Mr X complains about the Council’s policy for lost parking tickets, which meant he paid twice to park in a council-owned car park. He asked the Council to refund his second payment of £33.10 but the Council refused his request.

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 do not start an investigation if we decide 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

We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.

I appreciate Mr X is unhappy he had to pay twice to park his car but the injustice he claims- £33.10- is not significant enough to warrant investigation. We also could not say it was the result of any fault by the Council. This is because the Council has explained the reasons it will not issue Mr X a refund and these reasons are in-line with its policy. The Council’s policy allows for refunds in the event a motorist can provide evidence to show they have paid twice for the same period but Mr X has been unable to locate his original ticket. While I understand this is frustrating for Mr X the Council is entitled to have a policy for lost tickets and to charge motorists for parking where they cannot provide evidence to show they have already paid for their parking. Mr X considers his bank statement provides sufficient evidence to show he did, but the statement does not show the details of the vehicle or the period for which he paid. The Council was therefore entitled to decline to refund the lost ticket charge and it is not for us to criticise its decision.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the injustice Mr X claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Cambridge City Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-026-632 Other
25-008-114 13 Jan 2026 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to inform the complainants about changes to the Right … Other
25-008-589 12 Dec 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of public bins. This is because there is not … Other
25-010-011 08 Dec 2025 Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his homelessness application and its management of … Other
25-007-329 21 Oct 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s management of Mr X’s council tax account nor its failure … Other
View all decisions for this organisation