Summary: Mr C complained that the Council had issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice in error. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint because it is late since the incident occurred in 2014. Moreover, there is an alternative body that deals with Penalty Notice Charges appeals which it would have been reasonable for the PCN recipient to use.

The complaint

1. The complainant whom I shall call Mr C has complained the Council issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice in error in 2014. When it realised its mistake, he says it removed the charge from the website, but he says the Council had already taken him to court. He told us the Council later sent bailiffs to his house.
2. This has left him in debt, and he says he is now unable to find a new job due to the criminal record that he now has.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered all the information that Mr C provided to the Ombudsman as evidence. I gave Mr C the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. The Council operates civil parking enforcement according to the provisions of the Traffic Management Act 2004. The Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice in 2014 to a relative of Mr C whom I shall call Miss D.
8. In 2015 the Council sent Miss D a Notice of removal.
9. Later the following year in 2016, the Council responded to a complaint that Miss D had made. In this response the Council said the Penalty Charge Notice had not been paid for some months despite sending her a Notice to owner and later a Charge Certificate.
10. The Council went on to say it had not heard from her and that the Notice to owner gave her the chance to make representations saying why she should not pay the charge. When no representations were received and the amount remained outstanding, the Council said it had decided to forward the charge to the bailiffs.
11. In this instance the Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because the Penalty Charge Notice was issued in 2014. Therefore, Mr C did not complain to us in time. We can normally only investigate complaints people bring to us within 12 months.
12. Whilst the Ombudsman has discretion to look at complaints that are late, we will not be considering this complaint. This is because if Miss D disputed liability then it would have been reasonable to expect her to make representations to the Council at the time. Had the Council rejected Miss D’s representations then she had the right of appeal and would have been able to present her evidence at the independent Traffic Penalty Tribunal. It was reasonable to expect her to do so as this is the specific remedy the law provides for people to challenge a Penalty Charge Notice.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and because Miss D would have had a right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal it would have been reasonable for her to use.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman