Summary: Mr X complains the Council wrongly issued him with a Fixed Penalty Notice for littering. We have ended our investigation as the Council cancelled the Fixed Penalty Notice which was the outcome Mr X was seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly issued him with a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for littering on private land. Mr X says this caused him significant stress and frustration and would like the Council to cancel the FPN.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We 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. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(1)(A) and 25(7), as amended).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Fixed Penalty Notices

6. A person who receives a FPN for an alleged littering offence may either pay the FPN to cancel it or wait for the local authority to pursue the matter at court. If the local authority starts court action, the person would have the opportunity to challenge the FPN at court. Prior to doing either, they can make informal representations to the Council.

What happened

7. What follows is a brief chronology of key events. It does not include all the information I have reviewed during my investigation.
8. The Council has contracted issuing FPNs to an external contractor. The contractor issued Mr X with an FPN for littering in a car park. This required Mr X to pay £150 within 14 days to discharge any liability or risk prosecution in the magistrates’ court if he failed to make a payment. Mr X made representations to the contractor about the FPN. Mr X denied littering and questioned whether the Council, through its contractor, had powers to issue the FPN. This was due to the car park being on private land and the Council needing the landowner’s permission to issue fines.
9. The contractor considered Mr X’s representation but was satisfied it had been correctly issued. It advised Mr X to pay the fine or he could choose to contest the notice by appealing through the magistrates’ courts. The contractor allowed Mr X extra time to pay the fine as a gesture of goodwill. Mr X paid the fine but continued to raise concerns about the fine being issued on private land.
10. The contractor consulted with the Council about issuing FPNs on private land as the landowner had written withdrawing consent for the Council to issue fines on its land. The Council confirmed that legislation including the Environmental Protection Act 1990, Clean Neighbourhoods and Environment Act 2005 and Environment Act 2021 allowed it to issue FPNs on private land unless a landowner withdrew consent. The Council asked the contractor not to issue any further tickets at the car park as consent had been withdrawn.
11. The Council agreed to cancel Mr X’s FPN and refunded the £150 fine as a goodwill gesture although it had been issued before the landowner withdrew consent.

My assessment

12. The documents provided show the Council has considered concerns raised by Mr X about receiving an FPN on private land. The Council confirmed legislation allows it to issue fines unless landowner has withdrawn consent. Once the Council became aware the landowner had withdrawn consent it stopped issuing FPNs at the car park. It withdrew Mr X’s fine as a gesture of goodwill and has refunded Mr X’s payment. So, I am ending my investigation into Mr X’s complaint as this was the outcome Mr X was seeking when making his complaint. And I cannot add to any previous investigation by the Council.
13. Mr X was unhappy the Council issued the FPN and questioned whether it had authority to do so. But we would not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint. This is because we are not an appeal body. We cannot decide whether or not the alleged offence was committed; whether the FPN was correctly issued nor whether Mr X was liable. We also cannot cancel an FPN. These are matters the court would consider and decide if Mr X had decided to raise a defence against the issuing of the FPN in court if he believed it was incorrectly issued and wished to challenge it rather than pay it. It would be a suitable route for Mr X to use if he wished to challenge the FPN rather than pay it.

Back to top

Decision

I am ending my investigation into Mr X’s complaint as the Council cancelled the FPN which was the outcome Mr X was seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman