Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about Transport for London’s escalation of three penalty charge notices. This is because Ms X has put the matter to the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the way Transport for London (TfL) escalated three penalty charge notices (PCNs) and about the way it dealt with her complaint about the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court but cannot investigate if the person has already been to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Ms X’s complaint and the supporting information she provided. I shared my draft decision with Ms X’s representative and considered her comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. TfL issued Ms X three PCNs for moving traffic contraventions in 2019.
6. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for moving traffic contraventions. When a council identifies a contravention it will issue a PCN to the owner/registered keeper by post. This will detail the amount of the fine and the motorist’s right of appeal, firstly to the council itself and then to a Tribunal. The Council will send the PCN to the address of the registered keeper, as held by the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA).
7. The motorist has 28 days from the date of the notice to pay the penalty charge or make representations against it. For the first 14 days after the PCN the motorist may pay at a discounted rate of 50% of the full fine.
8. If the motorist does not pay the PCN or challenge it, or if their representations are unsuccessful, the council may issue a charge certificate increasing the amount of the penalty charge by 50%. If the charge remains unpaid the council may then register the debt with the county court and serve an order for recovery, providing a basis for action by enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from the motorist.
9. Ms X says she did not receive any correspondence from TfL and only became aware of the PCNs when bailiffs visited her and demanded payment. She complained to TfL but was not happy with the way it handled her complaint.
10. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. Ms X’s injustice lies in the PCNs issued by TfL and Ms X has applied to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court to challenge its escalation of these fines. This brings any complaint about the process outside out jurisdiction. Ms X questions the refusal of her applications but TfL is not responsible for this- the TEC is a separate body and if Ms X wishes to challenge its decision she would need to apply for a review.
11. While Ms X is also unhappy about the way the Council has dealt with her complaint, the courts have said that where we cannot investigate a complaint about the main or underlying issue, we cannot normally investigate related issues either. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration in England [2006] EWHC 2847 (Admin)). So, where the substance of a complaint is not subject to investigation, the Ombudsman does not investigate the Council’s handling of the issue in isolation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Ms X has applied to the TEC to challenge TfL’s escalation of the PCNs.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman