Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by Transport for London. Mr X is not the owner of the vehicle and his injustice stems from his agreement to indemnify the owner for any penalty charges rather than directly from the actions of the authority. If Transport for London agrees to transfer liability to Mr X it would be reasonable for him to appeal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by Transport for London (TfL).

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 must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

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. London Tribunals (previously known as the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service) considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint, made enquiries of TfL and discussed the complaint with Mr X.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X is a taxi driver. He hires a vehicle from a third party, Mr Y, who is the owner/registered keeper of the vehicle.
7. TfL issued Mr Y a PCN in February 2020 for contravening The Greater London (Central Zone) Congestion Charging Order 2004 by driving in the congestion charging area without paying the charge. Mr X was driving the vehicle at the time but liability rests with the owner/registered keeper of the vehicle, unless they apply to transfer liability to the hirer.
8. Mr X complains about the PCN as he says he set up an account with TfL to pay the congestion charge in January 2020. He says Mr Y has not paid the PCN and will ask TfL to transfer liability to him shortly.
9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. At present Mr Y is liable for the PCN regardless of the fact Mr X was driving the vehicle at the time of the contravention. Mr Y had a right of appeal against the PCN and if TfL accepts his request to transfer liability to Mr X it will reissue the PCN in his name. It would then be reasonable for Mr X to appeal if he disputes it. Until this point Mr X has no direct injustice from the issue of the PCN.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the PCN does not currently affect Mr X and if Mr Y applies to transfer liability to him it would be reasonable for him to appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman