Summary: Mrs X complains the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments after it rejected the formal representations she made to contest a Penalty Charge Notice she was issued for a parking violation in February 2018. She says its failure to do so meant she was unable to access the appeal process and contest the action it was taking. She states an enforcement agent eventually visited her home to recover the debt and the process would not have escalated to this stage had she been able to appeal. The Ombudsman has discontinued the investigation into this complaint. This is because Mrs X could have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal or filed a witness statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre to contest the action being taken by the Council, meaning we cannot investigate the matter. Moreover, we cannot achieve the outcome that she wants if we were to investigate her other concerns.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mrs X, complains the Council failed to make reasonable adjustments after it rejected the formal representations she made to contest a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) she was issued for a parking violation in February 2018. She says its failure to do so meant she was unable to access the appeal process and contest the action it was taking. She states an enforcement agent eventually visited her home to recover the debt and the process would not have escalated to this stage had she been able to appeal.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
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. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
5. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
6. 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 it is unlikely we would find fault or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
7. 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

8. I have:
• Read Mrs X’s complaint and the documents she submitted in support of it.
• Considered the supporting documents provided by the Council.
• 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

9. In mid-February 2018, one of the Council’s civil enforcement officers found Mrs X’s vehicle in a car park and checked whether a valid parking ticket had been purchased and displayed on the vehicle. The officer also checked whether a parking session had been paid for using the ‘pay by phone’ system. In both cases, the officer found that no payment had been made and therefore attached a £50 PCN to the windscreen of Mrs X’s vehicle at 12:47pm.
10. In mid-March 2018, the Council sent Mrs X a Notice to Owner (NtO). This asked her to pay the PCN in full or to submit formal representations to contest the charge.
11. In mid-April 2018, Mrs X submitted formal representations to the Council on the grounds that the contravention did not occur. She said she had used an application/app on her phone to pay for parking and provided a bank statement and parking receipts to support her case. One of the receipts showed she had paid for a parking session from 12:00 to 12:01pm on the day the contravention had occurred.
12. Shortly after receiving the representations, the Council considered them and sent a Notice of Rejection to Mrs X. It declined to waive the PCN because the parking session which she had paid for was not valid at the time the contravention occurred. It added there were no reported problems with the parking application that day and other users had not experienced any issues. Nevertheless, as a gesture of goodwill, it offered to reduce the charge by £25 if payment was received in full by the end of the month. It also explained Mrs X could appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal if she still wanted to contest the PCN.
13. In mid-May 2018, the Council sent Mrs X a Charge Certificate demanding payment of the full PCN plus an extra 25%, taking the total charge to £75. It did this because it had not received any payment from her, nor had it been notified that she had submitted an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. It asked her to pay the £75 within 14 days and said it may seek a county court order to recover the debt if payment was not received.
14. The Council did not receive payment therefore it registered the debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court at the end of June 2018.
15. In mid-July 2018, the Council sent Mrs X an Order for Recovery of Unpaid Penalty Charge. It said the amount due had increased to £83 as an £8 court registration fee had been incurred. It asked her to pay this amount or submit a witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre by the beginning of August 2018. It also warned her that her possessions could be removed and sold to pay the charge, if she did not act.
16. In mid-August 2018, the Council applied for a Warrant of Execution after no payment was received. It subsequently passed the debt to Mid-Kent Enforcement Services to recover.
17. Mid-Kent Enforcement Services state it sent two letters to Mrs X that were not responded to. At the beginning of May 2019, it transferred the debt to a partner enforcement agency as it did not have any agents working in the area where Mrs X lived that could recover the debt.
18. In mid-May 2019, the enforcement agency sent Mrs X a Notice of Enforcement. It stated she was now due to pay £158 after a compliance stage fee had been added.
19. At the end of the month, Mrs X emailed the enforcement agency after one of its agents had visited her property that day. She said she was disabled and lived in a vulnerable household, before adding she had not been informed the mater had proceeded to court. Consequently, she asked it to send her copies of the relevant court documentation and return the debt to the Council.
20. At the beginning of June 2019, an enforcement agent visited Mrs X’s property to recover the debt and subsequently received a payment of £393. This included the £158 due at the Notice of Enforcement stage plus a £235 fee for the enforcement stage.
21. Mrs X’s account of the visit differs from that of the enforcement agency. She states the agent who attended was in combat gear and did not identify himself, adding she feared she was going to be attacked. She said the police allowed him to enter her property without a court writ when they arrived and her lodger paid the outstanding amount, but did so under duress.
22. The enforcement agency provided its account when it wrote to Mrs X at the end of July 2019 in response to a complaint she had made about the matter. It said she told the agent who first visited her that she had paid the outstanding amount and was disabled, although she refused to discuss the latter issue in any detail. As the debt remained outstanding, it said another agent visited at the beginning of June and identified himself when Mrs X opened the door. It stated she then assaulted him when he tried to step inside the property, which led to him calling the police. After officers had arrived, it said one spoke to Mrs X inside the property and her lodger subsequently paid the outstanding amount. It also noted Mrs X apologised to the agent and it was satisfied he had acted legally.
23. In her complaint to the Ombudsman, Mrs X states she is vulnerable and this matter has caused her a great deal of stress. She also states the Council has refused to consider her complaint about the matter, despite her calling it several times to complain on the phone and providing details of her disability. To remedy the injustice she was caused, she wants it to reconsider her appeal and make reasonable adjustments so she can access this process. If it finds in her favour, she wants it to refund her the money that was paid to the enforcement agent and cancel the PCN.

Analysis

24. Mrs X feels the Council should have made adjustments to allow her to access the appeal process after it rejected her formal representations. At this stage, it informed her she should contact the Traffic Penalty Tribunal if she wanted to appeal its decision and provided details of how to do this. It also notified her it would seek a Charge Certificate then pursue court action if she did not appeal or pay the PCN. Consequently, the Traffic Penalty Tribunal was responsible for considering any reasonable adjustments requested by Mrs X at this stage, not the Council. It may have done so had she submitted an appeal, but I have seen no evidence that she did this.
25. I understand Mrs X states she was not notified the Council had sought to recover the debt through the courts. However, I have a copy of the Charge Certificate it sent her in May 2018 as well as a copy of the Order for Recovery of Unpaid Penalty Charge it sent in July 2018. Therefore, the evidence indicates she could have submitted a witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre if she wanted to contest the action being taken by the Council. Likewise, she could have asked the court to make reasonable adjustments if this would have helped her to access this part of the process.
26. 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. Similarly, we may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues raised could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. In this case, I have not found any reason why Mrs X could not have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal or filed a witness statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre. Therefore, I am not able to investigate this part of her complaint.
27. I have considered whether to investigate the actions of the enforcement agency and how it dealt with Mrs X as a vulnerable debtor. However, I have decided not to as I cannot achieve the outcome that Mrs X wants if I were to investigate this matter. This is because I can only make recommendations to remedy any injustice directly caused by a fault. In this case, Mrs X wants a fresh appeal and a refund of the amount paid. I could only recommend a new appeal if I were to find fault in the appeal process. However, I have decided I cannot investigate this matter, which means I would not be able to make this recommendation.
28. Finally, I have not investigated the way the Council handled Mrs X’s complaint about these matters. This is because the Ombudsman does not investigate concerns about complaint handling if we cannot or will not investigate the substantive issues being raised.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I have discontinued the Ombudsman’s investigation into this complaint. This is because Mrs X could have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal or filed a witness statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre to contest the action being taken by the Council, meaning the Ombudsman cannot investigate the matter. Moreover, I am unable to achieve the outcome that Mrs X wants if I investigate her other concerns.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman