Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. The Council accepts it was handled Mr X’s case poorly and has agreed to cancel the notice and refund Mr X’s payment of £130; this provides a satisfactory remedy for Mr X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice (PCN). He informally challenged the PCN but did not receive a response. The Council then increased the amount of the fine to £130, which Mr X has paid.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. 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

4. The Council issued Mr X a PCN for a parking contravention in September 2019.
5. 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’.
6. 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.
7. Mr X informally challenged the PCN under the process set out above but the Council did not respond. It accepts this was an oversight. It escalated the case and sent Mr X a notice to owner which increased the amount owed to £130.
8. Mr X wrote to the Council explaining he had challenged the PCN but not received a response. He also reiterated the reasons for his challenge. Before the Council responded Mr X paid the PCN to avoid further escalation. The Council then wrote to Mr X explaining that because he had paid the PCN the case was closed.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The Council accepts it did not properly handle Mr X’s case and has offered to cancel the PCN and refund his payment of £130. It should do this within the next four weeks.
10. The Council’s actions provide a satisfactory remedy for Mr X’s injustice and it is unlikely we would recommend anything further.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has offered a satisfactory remedy for Mr X’s injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman