Parking and other penalties


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • London Borough of Haringey (19 003 154)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 15-Jul-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X's complaint about the Council's issue of a penalty charge notice. The Council has cancelled the notice and this provides a suitable remedy for Ms X's injustice.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (18 015 943)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 05-Jul-2019

    Summary: The Council is not at fault for removing and destroying Mr X's car. The Council is at fault for providing wrong information and not replying to an email from Mr X. This caused Mr X some injustice because he went to unnecessary time and trouble. The Council has agreed to remedy this injustice with an apology and small payment.

  • London Borough of Lambeth (18 014 562)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 02-Jul-2019

    Summary: Ms B complains about the way the Council has handled refunds of charges associated with enforcement action it had taken for an alleged parking and a moving traffic offence. There was fault by the Council in ensuring the promised refunds were made to Ms B. The Council will make the payment to Ms B of the outstanding sum.

  • Liverpool City Council (18 010 221)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 26-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council issued him with three penalty charge notices relating to cars he does not own. He says he did not receive the notices before the Council instructed enforcement agents. He says the Council then did not respond to his complaints. The Ombudsman finds fault in how the Council considered information about Mr B's case and vulnerability.

  • Sefton Metropolitan Borough Council (19 000 514)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 24-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. The Council has cancelled the notice, apologised to Mr X and put in place further training to improve its practices. This provides a suitable remedy for Mr X's complaint.

  • Royal Borough of Kingston upon Thames (18 018 374)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 14-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr D complains about a penalty charge notice he received for a moving traffic offence during road closures at a cycling event. The Ombudsman has found fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to refund Mr D the cost of the penalty charge and fees.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (18 015 273)

    Statement Not upheld Parking and other penalties 14-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr Y complains about the Council's decision to exclude his address from a residential parking zone. Mr Y submitted a petition to the Council, but local Councillors refused his request for an amendment to the existing parking zone. There is no fault in the way the Council made its decision and we do not uphold the complaint.

  • London Borough of Waltham Forest (18 016 961)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 14-Jun-2019

    Summary: Mr B complains the Council refused to consider his informal representations against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). There was fault in the Council's failure to explain why it rejected Mr B's informal representations. The Council has agreed to cancel the PCN and refund the money paid.

  • London Borough of Ealing (19 001 709)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 14-Jun-2019

    Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X's complaint about the Council's handling of a penalty charge notice. The Council has agreed to cancel the notice and this provides a suitable remedy for Mr X's complaint.

  • Warwickshire County Council (18 015 118)

    Statement Upheld Parking and other penalties 07-Jun-2019

    Summary: Miss X complains the Council wrongly instructed enforcement agents to recover from her a debt associated with a penalty charge notice (PCN). The first she knew of the action was when an enforcement agent arrived at her home and asked for payment of £383 which she made. There was fault by the Council in making Miss X the liable person for the PCN debt and in how it dealt with her contacts. The Council will make a payment to Miss X to provide a suitable remedy.