Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council causing Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice (PCN). He is unhappy the Council has escalated the case, increased the amount of the fine and threatened to register the unpaid debt with the court.

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 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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint, made enquiries of the Council and considered its response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council issued Mr X a PCN for driving in a bus lane in November 2019.
6. Mr X did not receive the PCN and only became aware of it when the Council issued a ‘charge certificate’ at the next stage of the process. Mr X wrote to the Council to explain he did not receive the PCN and asked for evidence to show it was sent. He would like the Council to cancel the PCN or otherwise prove the contravention took place and that it wrote to him about it.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The Council has provided a copy of the PCN and it is correctly addressed. It has explained its posting procedures and it is unlikely we could say, on balance, that it failed to send the PCN. It is therefore unlikely we would find fault by the Council.
8. The Council has also confirmed that as a result of Mr X’s letter it wrote to him offering him a further opportunity to pay the PCN at the discounted rate of £30. The Council’s offer put Mr X back in the position he would have been, had he received the original PCN, and Mr X has now paid the PCN. The amount of his payment is not significant enough to warrant further investigation and I will not therefore investigate the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council causing Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman