Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it was reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about two penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued by the Council in December 2018 and January 2019.
2. Mrs X complains about the enforcement action taken by the Council which has increased the cost of the PCNs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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.
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the council knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the council of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I have written to Mrs X with my draft decision and given her an opportunity to comment.

Back to top

What I found

7. The Council issued Mrs X with two PCNs for parking contraventions in December 2018 and January 2019.
8. Councils must follow a set procedure when pursuing PCNs for parking contraventions. When a Council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal.
9. Mrs X raised an informal appeal to both PCNs issued. The Council rejected these appeals.
10. When a Council rejects an appeal, it should write to the motorist and issue 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 the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
11. The Council responded and issued a “notice to owner” to Mrs X. Mrs X did not raise formal representations or appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
12. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. If Mrs X disputed the PCN it would have been reasonable for her to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The Tribunal is the body set up to deal with disputes over PCNs and it is better placed to decide whether the contravention occurred.
13. I have seen nothing to suggest it would not have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to the Tribunal and we should therefore not exercise our discretion to investigate this complaint.
14. The Council has confirmed that it has not received a complaint from Mrs X about the enforcement action.
15. The Ombudsman can only investigate matters which have not gone through the Council’s complaints process if we consider that it would be unreasonable to notify the Council. I have seen nothing to suggest that it would not have been reasonable for Mrs X to complain to the Council about the enforcement action. Mrs X should raise a complaint with the Council in the first instance.

Back to top

Final decision

16. My decision is that the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman