Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing Mr X with a fixed penalty notice for littering. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement and Mr X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained he was given incorrect information when the Council issued him with a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for littering. Mr X said the enforcement agent (EA) who issued the FPN acted unlawfully and therefore wants the Council to cancel it.
2. Mr X also complained about how the Council handled his complaint.
3. Mr X said this caused extreme distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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 there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. We have the power to start or end an investigation into a complaint about actions the law allows us to investigate. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been mentioned as part of the legal proceedings regarding a closely related matter. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended, section 34(B))

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. Mr X received an FPN for littering in October 2025. Mr X said he asked the EA issuing the FPN to consider not issuing the notice, because of personal circumstances.
9. Mr X said the EA gave him false information, which he believed to be unlawful. He said this led to him giving the EA his information, because he felt compelled to do so.
10. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint and said the EA acted appropriately, but acknowledged they could have been clearer in the information they provided. The Council apologised to Mr X for this. However, it said the FPN was valid and remained payable.
11. A person who receives a FPN for an alleged littering offence may either pay the FPN or wait for the Council to pursue the matter in court. If the Council starts court action, the person can challenge the FPN in court. Therefore, Mr X can raise a defence in court against the issuing of an FPN if he believes the EA acted unlawfully and this affects the validity of it.
12. The Ombudsman cannot tell the Council it should cancel an FPN. The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint and apologised where the EA could have communicated information more clearly. There is therefore no worthwhile outcome achievable by us investigating.
13. For these reasons, we will not investigate this complaint.
14. Finally, as we will not investigate the substantive matters of the complaint, we will not investigate the Council’s handling of the complaint because it is not proportionate to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement and Mr X can raise a defence against the issuing of the notice in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman