Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of some penalty charge notices. This is because the complainant had the right to make representations. In the event the Council rejected them, it would have been reasonable to expect the complainant to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of penalty notices charges (PCNs) for crossing the Mersey Gateway Bridge without paying the toll.

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 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. 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

5. I have reviewed the information and evidence provided by Mr X and the Council. I sent Mr X a draft decision and have considered his comments.

Back to top

What I found

PCNs

6. If someone disagrees with a PCN, they may challenge it by making representations to the Council. Each PCN provides details on how to do so. The Council will decide whether to cancel the PCN. If the Council rejects the motorist’s representations, they can either pay the penalty or appeal to the independent adjudicator at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
7. If the penalty remains unpaid, the Council will register the penalty as a civil debt in court, before instructing enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover it.
8. When a penalty is registered as a civil debt, the motorist can apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) for a witness statement if they do not think the Council has followed the correct process. For example, they may say they made representations and did not get a reply. If the TEC accepts the witness statement it orders the Council to take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating the appeal rights.

Background

9. The Council issued Mr X with a number of PCNs for crossing the Mersey Gateway Bridge without paying the toll. Mr X says that he has paid the tolls and complains that the Council has failed to consider his proof of payments.
10. PCNs advise motorists of their appeal rights and process to follow. The Council says it has advised Mr X to make representations against each PCN to avoid enforcement proceedings. It says no representations have been made. The Council has signposted Mr X to the TEC and provided information on how to apply to make a late witness statement. I have not seen anything to suggest Mr X applied to the TEC.

Assessment

11. I will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could have appealed to the Tribunal.
12. Mr X was invited to make representations and to apply to the TEC to make a witness statement. Mr X could have challenged the first PCN he received in 2017 and then appealed to the Tribunal if the Council rejected his challenge. He could then have appealed to the Tribunal and it would have considered his submission that he had paid the toll. Mr X could have used this process for every PCN he has received since 2017. If he had followed this process in 2017 then it is unlikely he would have continued to receive PCNs until 2019. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed to the Tribunal because it is the appropriate body to consider disputes about PCNs. An appeal to the Tribunal is free and relatively easy to use.
13. Mr X says he tried to make representations but the website crashed due to the volume of PCNs. However, each PCN should be challenged individually. In addition, if Mr X thought he had been prevented from making representations he could have appealed to the TEC.
14. The matter has progressed to bailiffs because Mr X neither paid nor appealed. This is not an indication of fault but a reflection of what happens if someone does not follow the correct process in relation to a PCN.

Back to top

Final decision

15. I will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman