Summary: The complainant says the Council failed to note and act upon a change of address. The complainant says this resulted in enforcement agents clamping his car. The complainant missed a hospital appointment and took unplanned time away from work to visit the Council and resolve the dispute. The Council says it had used the wrong information, apologised to the complainant but did not consider any further remedy. The Ombudsman finds the Council at fault and recommends a remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council failed to:
• Properly issue a Notice to Owner;
• Suspend recovery action while investigating his concerns;
• Prevent the clamping of his car and;
• Properly consider his complaint.
2. Mr X says this resulted in enforcement agents clamping his car. Mr X says he had to miss work and a hospital appointment to attend the Council’s offices to resolve the dispute and have his car unclamped.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. If 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. In considering this complaint I have:
• Contacted Mr X and read the information sent with his complaint;
• Put enquiries to the Council and reviewed its responses;
• Researched the relevant law, guidance and policy;
• Shared with Mr X and the Council my draft decision and reflected on any comments received.

Back to top

What I found

6. Councils powers to issue and enforce Penalty Charge Notices derives from part 6 of the Traffic Management Act 2004 (TMA 2004).
7. Under TMA 2004 the government has issued the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) General Regulations 2007 and the Civil Enforcement of Parking Contraventions (England) Representations and Appeals Regulations 2007.
8. Under the General Regulations where a civil enforcement officer believes a parking contravention has occurred that officer may fix a Penalty Charge Notice to the vehicle or it may be sent to the Registered Keeper.
9. A motorist can pay a reduced Penalty Charge within 14 days (or 21 days if served by post).
10. Where a motorist does not pay the Penalty Charge councils may send a Notice to Owner which offers an opportunity to pay the change or to make formal representations against the penalty charge.
11. Councils must consider representations within 28 days of the Notice to Owner and has discretion to consider any representations received outside this period. A council should respond to the representations and give its reasons if it decides to reject them. Councils must withdraw the Penalty Charge Notice if the motorist can show he or she meets one of the statutory grounds. Councils have discretion to withdraw a notice on other grounds.
12. Where the motorist does not pay a Penalty Charge Notice and does not present any representations, or the council rejects those representations, councils may register the debt with the court through the Traffic Enforcement Centre. When this happens, the Council must within seven days send an order telling the registered keeper setting out what the registered keeper must do.

What happened

13. On 3 March 2018 the Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice for a parking contravention. Mr X is the registered keeper of the car involved as confirmed by the DVLA. The Council sent notices to the DVLA registered address for Mr X.
14. Mr X did not receive the notice. Mr X filed with the Traffic Enforcement Centre a witness statement saying that he had not received the original Notice to Owner. Mr X had given his current address on the witness statement. The Council therefore should have issued a further Notice to Owner (using his current address) giving Mr X the opportunity to decide if he should pay the charge or make formal representations. The Council did not change the address but sent a new Notice to Owner to the original, wrong address. Therefore, Mr X did not receive the new Notice to Owner and so did not pay the Penalty Charge. When Mr X did not pay the charge or send in representations the Council passed the debt for collection to its enforcement agents.
15. The Council’s enforcement agents visited Mr X in January 2019 and clamped Mr X’s car. This came as a shock to Mr X who had not received any further notice from the Council. The enforcement agents said they could not release the car without full payment and costs. Mr X went to the Council’s offices to resolve the dispute which meant he had to take a day off work and miss a hospital appointment. Mr X felt he had no choice because each day that passed further costs might accrue and the enforcement agents told him he would have to take up his concerns with the Council.
16. Once Mr X had spoken to officers at the Council, they realised the Council’s mistake. The officers directed the enforcement agents to release the car that day. Mr X had been without his car for a day, missed work and a hospital appointment.
17. Mr X complained to the Council. In February 2019 the Council apologised for its error and cancelled the Penalty Charge Notice and all costs associated with it.
18. Mr X says the Council did not take his complaint seriously. The Council says it did not consider its error warranted any further remedy than an apology and cancelling the Penalty Charge Notice. Mr X believes the Council should pay him compensation for the inconvenience and shock at having his car clamped through the Council’s own mistake.
19. In response to my enquiries the Council accepts fault and offered to pay £100 in recognition of the distress and inconvenience caused to Mr X. In commenting on my draft decision, the Council says following Mr X’s visit to the Council it updated its record and re-issued the Notice to Owner. This allowed him to make representations disputing the Penalty Charge Notice. After considering his letter sent following the re-issue of the Notice to Owner the Council cancelled the Penalty Charge Notice.

Analysis – was there fault leading to injustice?

20. The Council sent the original Notice to Owner to the address held by the DVLA which is consistent with usual practice. Once Mr X had filed a statement showing he had not received the Notice to Owner the Council knew it must send all letters and notices to the new address given. It failed to make the change on its data base and continued sending letters, reminders or notices to the original address.
21. When it decided to enforce the debt by using enforcement agents the Council should have carried out a thorough check of the records to check it had properly served all notices on the correct address. It failed to do so. A proper check would include checking the address given in the witness statement. This failure compounded the original error in not updating the record to show Mr X’s address. Despite this failure the enforcement agents knew the correct address to find Mr X and his car. I find the Council acted with fault in not changing the address when it received notice of the new address through the witness statement. I find the Council acted with further fault in failing to identify through proper checks that it and its agents had sent all notices and letters about the debt to the correct address.
22. The Council’s error denied Mr X the opportunity to make representations and have his case for withdrawing the Penalty Charge Notice considered at an earlier date. Mr X later had the opportunity when having complained the Council re-issued the Notice to Owner.
23. An unexpected, unannounced visit from enforcement agents who clamp your car and will not remove the clamp without payment is a significant event for anyone. The Council’s enforcement agents would not liaise with the Council. They followed usual practice in directing Mr X to the Council. Therefore, Mr X visited the Council’s offices. This put Mr X to extra avoidable inconvenience causing him stress. Mr X took unannounced time off work and missed a hospital appointment because of the Council error. This is in addition to being denied the opportunity of making representations earlier.
24. The Council accepts fault and has offered a remedy I must now consider if that remedy reflects the impact of the fault. The payment I have recommended reflects the impact on Mr X and the Council’s cancellation of the Penalty Charge Notice and all costs associated with it.

Recommended and agreed action

25. To address the injustice arising from the faults identified in this investigation I recommend, and the Council agrees that within four weeks of my final decision it will:
• Apologise to Mr X for the failure to carry out proper checks and identify the continued use of the wrong address leading its enforcement agents to clamp Mr X’s car;
• Pay Mr X £200 to reflect the significant impact on Mr X of having an unannounced visit by bailiffs.

Back to top

Final decision

26. In completion of my investigation I find the Council at fault and it has agreed to remedy the fault as recommended in this decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman