Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a fixed penalty notice for a parking offence. This is because the courts were better placed to decide whether the notice was valid.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr B, says the Council wrongly issued him with a fixed penalty notice (FPN) for exceeding the 2-hour permitted parking period in a car park.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. We use 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. We 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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. In that regard, we may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably have been raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• Mr B’s complaint to the Ombudsman;
• The Council’s 21 January 2020 response to Mr B’s appeal against the FPN;
• An update from the Council about the status of the FPN.
5. I also gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on a draft version of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of what happened

6. The Council issued Mr B with a FPN for exceeding the maximum permitted parking period in a council car park. Mr B disputes the FPN, as he says the Council cannot prove when he entered the car park. He appealed to the Council, but it refused to cancel the FPN.
7. Mr B paid the FPN.

Assessment

8. There is no further appeal right for FPNs, as there is with other types of parking fines; the Council may issue a FPN if they consider an offence has been committed and if a motorist disputes this they may refuse to pay. If the Council then prosecutes the motorist for non-payment, the motorist may put their case to the court and explain why they do not think the offence took place.
9. The Ombudsman normally takes the view that the courts are better placed to determine whether the offence took place and if, therefore, the FPN is valid. So, with reference to paragraphs 2 and 3 above, I do not consider the Ombudsman should investigate Mr B’s complaint, because he could have chosen not to pay the FPN and then presented his case in court if the Council subsequently prosecuted him.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint. This is because the courts were better placed to decide if the FPN was valid.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman