Summary: Ms X complains the Council has issued her numerous Penalty Charge Notices and repeatedly tries to recover unpaid charges from her, despite the Traffic Enforcement Centre consistently finding in her favour. She also complains two councillors have breached the Nolan principles and says the Council has not dealt with her code of conduct complaints about these matters in the correct manner. The Ombudsman has discontinued its investigation into this complaint. This is because the parts of the complaint are out of our jurisdiction, premature, or they do not warrant further investigation as there is no evidence of significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Ms X, complains the Council has issued her numerous Penalty Charge Notices and repeatedly tries to recover unpaid charges from her, despite the Traffic Enforcement Centre consistently finding in her favour. She also complains two councillors have breached the Nolan principles and says the Council has not dealt with her code of conduct complaints about these matters in the correct manner.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. London Tribunals (previously known as the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service) considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for the London area.
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about certain types of commercial and contractual transactions. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 3, as amended)
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))
7. The Courts have said that we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council, concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration [2006] EHWCC 2847 (Admin))
8. The law also says we can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
9. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained or the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
10. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

11. I have:
• Read Ms X’s complaint and the information she submitted in support of it.
• Considered the Council’s comments about the complaint and the information it provided.
• Provided both parties with an opportunity to comment on the draft decision and considered the comments that were made.

Back to top

What I found

12. Ms X has complained about several matters which I have decided we cannot or should not investigate. I have discussed each part of her complaint below and explained how I reached my decision.

Part one – the Council’s decision to reissue Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs)

13. Ms X says the Council keeps reissuing her PCNs for the same parking offences despite knowing they will be revoked by the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) as the facts of the case do not change. She states the TEC initially found in her favour because she was not the owner of the vehicle involved in the violations. In addition, she says enforcement notices issued by the Council since March 2019 do not contain the same wording as the PCNs she was issued.
14. I note the Council wrote to Ms X on 18 January 2019 stating it had reviewed 11 outstanding PCNs it had issued her for parking contraventions. It stated they had been issued correctly and said:

“You have had the opportunity to challenge the validity of the issued PCNs through the Independent Adjudication service, but have not done so for any of the outstanding PCNs. At each stage, the appeals process has been explained to you, as has the requirement to make payment if the appeals process was not followed.”

15. It also discussed five statutory declarations that Ms X submitted to the TEC. These resulted in the revocation of the orders for recovery of the unpaid PCNs and the cancelation of the charge certificates and notice to owners/enforcement notices. It highlighted the direction given by the TEC clearly stated the PCNs had not been cancelled and further action could be taken by the Council. Consequently, it said it advised Ms X of its intentions by issuing a further PCN in each instance and was satisfied it had followed the correct process. It advised Ms X to contact the TEC if she felt this was not the case.
16. On every occasion the Council issues Ms X a PCN, she can submit formal representations to it in response if she wants to appeal and has the statutory grounds to do so. There are numerous statutory grounds for appeal, one of which includes the recipient of the PCN not being the owner of the vehicle concerned. If Ms X were to submit a formal representation and the Council were to reject it, it should issue her a 'Notice of Rejection of Representation'. This would allow her to appeal to a parking adjudicator. In London, these appeals are heard by London Tribunals.
17. I have not seen any evidence the Council has denied her the right to make formal representations or has prevented her from accessing her right of appeal to the London Tribunals. Therefore, I cannot investigate this part of her complaint. This is because the law says we cannot investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. In this case, Ms X was aware of the process and knew how to submit formal representations and appeal, however for some reason she did not do so.

Part two – Councillor Y and the Nolan principles

18. Ms X complains Councillor Y breached the Nolan principles when dealing with her enquiries about the Council’s traffic and parking enforcement contract. The Nolan principles are otherwise known as the seven principles of public life and apply to anyone who works in public office.
19. We cannot investigate significant commercial or contractual transactions entered into by companies or large organisations. This part of Ms X’s complaint relates to a significant contract entered into by the Council for the provision of parking services. Therefore, I cannot investigate it.

Part three – Councillor Z and the Nolan principles

20. Ms X submitted two code of conduct complaints against Councillor Z. The first was at the end of April 2019 and relates to his level of communication with Ms X, his competence, a lack of support, a lack of leadership, and councillors generally being unavailable. She submitted the second in mid-June 2019 and complained about a phrase he used in a ‘tweet’ the Councillor made on social media, which she asserted was racist and offensive. I understand the Council has provided a response to both complaints.
21. Regarding the first complaint, I asked Ms X for more detail about what the Councillor did wrong and why his actions had caused her an injustice. However, she did not provide this information. Therefore, without any further details I am unable to conclude she has been caused any significant injustice.
22. In relation to Ms X’s second complaint, the Councillor stated the phrase he used was not intended to be racist and was used when one party wanted to question another’s interpretation of an occurrence or event. I understand the Council decided the matter did not merit formal investigation but said it had advised the Councillor to avoid colloquial expressions which may be open to interpretation. I have reviewed the comments that were made and I do not believe they caused Ms X any significant injustice.
23. Considering all these points, I have decided not to investigate the complaints Ms X has made against Councillor Z. This is because there is no evidence that she was caused significant injustice.

Complaint handling and other issues raised within the complaint

24. The courts have said we cannot investigate a complaint about any action by a council, concerning a matter which is itself out of our jurisdiction. Similarly, we will not investigate complaints about complaint handling if we exercise discretion and decide not to investigate the substantive issue. Consequently, I cannot investigate Ms X’s concerns about the way the Council handled the code of conduct complaint she made against Councillor Y. Likewise, I will not investigate her code of conduct complaint against Councillor Z.
25. Ms X has raised concerns about the way the Council has dealt with Subject Access Requests (SARs) and Freedom of Information (FoI) requests she has submitted to it. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) deals with complaints about these issues, not the Ombudsman. Therefore, Ms X should complain to this body if she wants to pursue the matter.
26. She has also complained about the Council’s continuing insistence that she uses a single point of contact when communicating with it. In a previous case, the Ombudsman told Ms X she should complain to the Council if she feels its decision to restrict her contact was flawed. She was also told she could complain to us after she had exhausted the Council’s complaint procedure. I have not seen any evidence that Ms X has complained to the Council about this matter, therefore I cannot investigate it as her complaint is premature. If Ms X wants to pursue the matter, she should submit a complaint to the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have discontinued the Ombudsman’s investigation into this complaint. This is because the parts of the complaint are out of our jurisdiction, premature, or they do not warrant further investigation as there is no evidence of significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman