Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council handled his concerns after it issued a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN). Mr X said this distressed him and impacted him financially. There was fault in the way the Council provided incorrect information and did not fully respond to Mr X’s representations. This distressed Mr X. The Council agreed to apologise.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council handled his concerns after it issued a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN). Mr X said this distressed him and impacted him financially.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We cannot question whether a Council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with a Council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
5. 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

6. I read Mr X’s complaint and spoke to him about it on the phone.
7. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

9. This is a summary of events, outlining key facts and does not cover everything that has occurred in this case.
10. The Council contracted issuing FPNs to an external contractor.
11. The Contractor issued Mr X two FPNs for public order concerns at the start of January 2025. Mr X challenged the enforcement officer and said he did not do what the officer accused him of.
12. Mr X complained to the Contractor two days later. He explained he did not do either of the acts the Contractor penalised him for.
13. The Contractor responded to the complaint at the start of February 2025. The Contractor said it was reasonable to issue one FPN for the offences, so cancelled the other. The Contractor explained the FPN process and said there was no formal ground of appeal. The response said if Mr X wanted to dispute the FPN, he could appeal to the Magistrates Court. The response stated, “therefore your representation has been declined”.
14. Mr X paid the FPN in March 2025.
15. Mr X was not satisfied with the Council’s response and has asked the Ombudsman to investigate. Mr X would like the Council to refund his payment, take action against the staff and provide a financial payment.
16. In response to my enquiries the Council stated the Contractor considered the representations as it cancelled one of the FPNs. It accepted some wording in its letter was wrong, and other parts were not clear enough.

My findings

17. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to decide whether the FPN should be rescinded or the fine refunded, that is the Council’s job. We can only consider whether the Council considered the matter properly.
18. There is no formal appeal against an FPN as the FPN is offered instead of prosecution. Recipients can either pay the fine to discharge their liability or offer a defence in a Magistrates’ Court. Prior to doing either, they can make informal representations to the Council.
19. Mr X made representations to the Contractor. It should consider the information and judge each case on its merits. We cannot criticise where officers have followed the correct procedures and reached a reasoned decision.
20. The Contractor considered Mr X’s representations and reviewed the officer’s body camera footage. It decided one FPN was reasonable and cancelled the other. The Contractor decided it properly issued the FPN and should not cancel it. Mr X disagrees with this decision, but it is one the Contractor was entitled to make.
21. We would expect the Council to explain the reasons for its decision. The Contractor’s response sets out Mr X had an appeal right to the Magistrates Court if he wished to challenge the decision. This is not correct. Mr X had the right not to pay the FPN and defend his position in Court.
22. The Council has confirmed there was an issue with the Contractor at the time Mr X received the FPN. The Contractor was using wrong terminology in its letters, setting out an appeal right, rather than the correct process. However, I cannot say what Mr X would have done if he had this information. The Contractor acted and trained its staff. The Contractors letter did not provide a response to all the points Mr X raised in his representations. The Council accepted this fault and confirmed the Contractor trained its staff after this concern. The Contractors letter contained wrong information when detailing Mr X’s rights and did not fully respond to his representations. This is fault, distressing Mr X.
23. The Council confirmed during my investigation it no longer contracts with the Contractor. As the Contractor is no longer involved in this service, I do not propose to make service improvement recommendations.

Back to top

Agreed action

24. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused to Mr X by the fault I have identified, the Council agreed to take the following action within 4 weeks of my final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X for the distress caused by providing incorrect information when he challenged the FPN. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
25. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

26. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault by the Council, which caused injustice to Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman