Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that he has been wrongly issued a Fixed Penalty Notice for public urination. This is because Mr X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court if he wishes to challenge it.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has wrongly issued him a Fixed Penalty Notice for urinating in public. Mr X says he did not commit the alleged offence. He also complains about the Council’s response to his subject access request.

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)
3. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council issued Mr X a Fixed Penalty Notice for the alleged offence of public urination. Mr X says he did not commit the offence.
9. Mr X made a subject access request requesting all the evidence held on the matter. The Council refused to disclose the information, citing ongoing proceedings. Mr X has already complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about this.
10. The Council explained to Mr X that he can either pay the FPN or let the matter progress to the magistrates court where he can defend the matter.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because Mr X can raise a defence against the issuing of the FPN in court if he believes it was incorrectly issued and wishes to challenge it rather than pay it. We are not an appeal body. We cannot decide whether or not Mr X committed the alleged offence; whether the FPN was correctly issued nor whether Mr X is liable to pay the charge. These are matters the magistrates court will consider and decide and this is the suitable route for Mr X to use to challenge the issuing of the FPN.
12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Councils response to his subject access request. This is because Mr X has already complained to the ICO about it and it is the body best placed to consider it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the route to challenge the issuing of the FPN is to raise a defence against its issue in court and the data issue is best considered and decided by ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman