Summary: Mr Y says the Council ignored evidence that he was not the registered keeper of a vehicle at the time 10 penalty charge notices were issued. The Council accepts it missed opportunities to seek more information about Mr Y’s mental health problems and vulnerability. The Council has agreed to remove Mr Y’s name from the outstanding cases and take no further action against him.

The complaint

1. Ms X, an advice worker, complains on behalf of Mr Y, the Council has ignored evidence that he was not the owner or keeper of a vehicle at the time it issued penalty charge notices and that it continues to pursue payment despite his vulnerability due to mental health issues.
2. The demands for money he does not owe or have have caused anxiety to Mr Y.

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 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of the investigation, I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by the complainant’s representative;
• made enquiries of the Council and considered the comments and documents the Council provided;
• sent my draft decision to both the Council and the complainant’s representative and invited their comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr Y sold a van to his employer who owns a vehicle business. Neither Mr Y or his employer provided change of owner details to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA). Mr Y’s employer then sold the vehicle to another owner. Again no change of owner details were provided to the DVLA.
7. Mr Y began to receive penalty charge notices (PCN’s) for driving contraventions across London. The PCN’s came for several different local authorities.
8. Ms X says they wrote on behalf of Mr Y to the local authorities issuing the fines. They say they all accepted the information presented and cancelled the fines except for the London Borough of Harrow.
9. Between 10 January and 17 February 2018, the Council issued 10 PCN’s against the vehicle previously owned by Mr Y. The DVLA records showed Mr Y as the registered keeper and so all PCN’s were sent to his address.
10. Mr Y and his wife wrote to the Council about the PCN’s in May and July 2018. Mr Y provided a copy of a letter from DVLA which said it accepted he had sold the vehicle in August 2017 and had not amended its records.
11. The Council did not accept the DVLA letter as proof he was not the owner at the time of the contraventions. It asked him to provide further evidence such as cancellation of insurance, bill of sale or transfer of funds. Mr Y was unable to provide any further evidence.
12. The Council issued a warrant on six of the PCN’s and passed the cases to enforcements agent to pursue.
13. Mr Y sought help from an advice centre. He explained the distress the situation was causing as the charges were increasing now enforcement agents were involved. Mr Y said he was unable to provide any further evidence and could not understand why this council would not accept the DVLA letter as proof he was not liable for the contraventions when all other councils had.
14. The advice centre made representations to the Council on behalf of Mr Y. They explained he had mental health problems and so was a vulnerable person. The Council maintained its position that the DVLA records showed Mr Y was the registered keeper when the contraventions occurred and that it could not cancel the fines without further evidence.

Analysis

15. In response to my enquiries about this complaint, the Council acknowledges that it missed opportunities to seek further evidence about Mr Y’s mental health problems and vulnerability. The information provided shows that while mental health issues were mentioned by the advice centre in some of its correspondence, it was not always mentioned and no supporting evidence was ever provided.
16. Mr Y did not make prompt representations following the issuing of the PCN’s. He did not write to the Council until May 2018, about three months after the tenth PCN was issued.
17. The Council says that no mention of mental health problems was raised in response to four PCN’s. Three of these cases were passed to enforcement agents for collection. I would not criticise the Council for taking further action on cases where no payment was made, additional evidence requested was not provided and no details of mental health problems was raised.
18. As stated above, the Council accepts it missed opportunities to look further into Mr Y’s mental health issues and vulnerability. It has proposed a remedy for his complaint. I consider the actions proposed by the Council to be an appropriate remedy for this case. I will detail the agreed action below.

Agreed action

19. The Council offers its apologies to Mr and Mrs Y for it not addressing his mental health issues. It says it is addressing this with staff and providing refresher training for all staff involved in these cases.
20. There are currently six PCN’s still open for recovery in the name of Mr Y. The Council says it is happy to accept the information from the advice centre that Mr Y meets the vulnerability criteria without requiring any further evidence. It has taken this view because of its knowledge of the advice centre and that it will have taken a professional view when assessing Mr Y’s vulnerability.
21. The Council will now accept the DVLA letter as proof Mr Y was not the owner when the contraventions occurred. It will remove Mr Y’s name from its records and no further action will be taken against him.
22. The Council will also ask for the return of any cases still with the enforcement agents and will remove any costs.
23. The Council should complete these actions within one month of my final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I will now complete my investigation as a suitable remedy is agreed. I thank the Council for proposing this remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman