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.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council wrongly issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
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 London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed Ms X’s complaint, shared my draft decision with her and invited her comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council issued Ms X a PCN in March 2019. Ms X challenged the PCN and the Council cancelled it. Ms X says the matter caused her friend (Ms Y) stress as she felt responsible for it. She is concerned the Council issued other PCNs at the same time which she believes are also invalid and would like the Council to cancel them and refund any payments made.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The statutory appeals process allows for informal challenges to PCNs and there is no fault in the way the Council handled Ms X’s challenge in this case. It has considered the grounds put forward by Ms X and cancelled the PCN and this provides a suitable remedy for Ms X’s injustice. It is therefore unlikely we would recommend anything further for her.
8. Ms Y was not a party to the PCN and is not directly affected by it. While she may have felt responsible for the PCN the Council has cancelled it and Ms X is not therefore required to pay any fine.
9. Ms X is concerned about fines issued to other motorists but if any motorist disputes a PCN it would be for them to appeal. The Council must consider each case on its merits and the statutory appeals process is the proper route for challenging PCNs.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council’s cancellation of the PCN provides a suitable remedy for Ms X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman