Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a fixed penalty notice issued by the Council. This is because it primarily concerns Mr X’s liability for the notice and this is a matter for the courts rather than the Ombudsman.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about a fixed penalty notice (FPN) issued by the Council for fly-tipping. Mr X disputes liability for the FPN and says the Council failed to properly consider his appeal against it. He also complains her did not receive a copy of the FPN by post.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. An FPN gives the recipient the opportunity to discharge liability for a criminal offence, in this case fly-tipping, by paying a fine. If they do not pay, the Council may take action against them at court for non-payment.
6. We cannot determine the validity of the FPN or Mr X’s liability for it. This is a matter for the courts. If therefore Mr X wishes to dispute the FPN he may refuse to pay the fine and, if the Council issues proceedings against him, he can present his arguments and evidence to the magistrate. They can then decide if Mr X is liable for the offence.
7. While Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his internal appeal against the FPN it is clear the Council responded to this and confirmed it remained valid. Mr X sent the Council further challenges to the FPN which he says it failed to respond to, but the Council says this was because Mr X had set out his intention to challenge the FPN at court.
8. Mr X’s further challenges explained the reasons he would not fly-tip but did not provide any clear evidence to show he was not responsible for the offence. It is therefore unlikely we could say that had the Council responded, the outcome would have been different.
9. Mr X has also raised concerns about not receiving the FPN by post but it is clear from the information provided that he is aware of the FPN, has detailed knowledge of the system including the process to dispute liability and that any failures by the Council on this point have not affected his ability to challenge the FPN. We would not therefore investigate this point separately.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the courts are better placed to consider Mr X’s dispute against the FPN.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman