Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London. If Mr X disputed the notices it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about two penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued to him by Transport for London (TfL).

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint, shared my draft decision with him and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. TfL issued Mr X two PCNs for entering the congestion charge zone without paying the fee. Mr X disputes the PCNs and says he paid the fee online. He made representations to TfL but TfL rejected them. He has not paid the PCNs so TfL has now passed the cases to enforcement agents to recover payment.
6. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. If Mr X was not happy with TfL’s decision to reject his representations it would have been reasonable for him to appeal. TfL’s rejection carried a right of appeal to London Tribunals and they are the appropriate body to deal with disputes over the validity of PCNs. I have seen nothing to suggest it would not have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals and I will not therefore exercise our discretion to investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal against the PCN to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman