Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. The issue was more appropriate for consideration as part of an appeal and the amount of the penalty charge is not significant enough to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by the Council. He has now paid the PCN at the discounted rate of £55 but would like the Council to refund his payment.

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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s response. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council issued Mr X a PCN for a parking contravention in late 2019.
7. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for parking contraventions and handling appeals against them. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal; appeals at this stage are known as ‘informal challenges’.
8. If the motorist submits an informal challenge to a PCN and the Council decides not to accept them, it will write to the motorist and explain why. If the motorist accepts the Council’s reasons they may pay the PCN; if not, they may wait for a ‘notice to owner’. This provides a further opportunity for the owner of the vehicle to pay the charge or make ‘formal representations’ against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to London Tribunals.
9. Mr X disputes the PCN and informally challenged it under the process set out at Paragraph 7. The Council rejected Mr X’s challenge and because Mr X was away from home for an extended period he did not seek to challenge it further under the process set out at Paragraph 8; instead, he paid the PCN at the discounted rate of £55.
10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The validity of the PCN is a matter for the appeals process but Mr X chose to pay the PCN rather than appeal. There was no fault by the Council affecting Mr X’s ability to appeal and the amount of his payment is not significant enough to warrant the cost of our continued investigation into this matter. I will not therefore exercise the Ombudsman’s discretion to investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X’s dispute over the validity of the PCN was a matter for the appeals process and the matter has not caused him significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman