Birmingham City Council (21 015 622)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 21 Mar 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about two Penalty Charge Notices. This is because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, complains about two Penalty Charge Notices (PCN).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  3. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes the letters the Council sent about the PCNs. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and invited Ms X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. The Council issued PCNs in August and September for entering the clean air zone without paying the charge. Ms X challenged one PCN and said she had paid the charge. For the other PCN Ms X said the signs were unclear.
  2. In response the Council explained that Ms X had paid for 2 and 5 August but she did not pay to enter the zone on 3 August. For the other PCN the Council provided details of the signage. For both PCNs the Council gave Ms X the option to pay or appeal to the tribunal.
  3. Ms X has neither paid nor appealed. The Council has registered one PCN in court. If Ms X does not pay the Council could instruct bailiffs. The Council may register the other PCN in court.
  4. I will not investigate this complaint because Ms X could have appealed to the tribunal regarding both PCNs. She could have appealed and submitted that the signage is inadequate or appealed and said she had paid the charge for 3 August. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider PCN disputes. The tribunal could have decided if the signage is adequate or if Ms X paid the charge for 3 August. In addition, the tribunal is free to use and the Council notified Ms X of her appeal rights.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I will not investigate this complaint because Ms X could have appealed to the tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings