London Borough of Hammersmith & Fulham (19 019 429)
Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 24 Mar 2020
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would be reasonable for her to appeal.
The complaint
- The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN) and has refused her informal challenge to the PCN.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
- 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)
- London Tribunals (previously known as the Parking and Traffic Appeals Service) considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
- I reviewed Miss X’s complaint and the Council’s response to her informal challenge. I shared my draft decision with Miss X and invited her comments.
What I found
- The Council issued Miss X a PCN for a parking contravention in January 2020.
- 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’.
- If the motorist submits an informal challenge to a PCN and the Council decides not to accept them, it will write to them 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 registered keeper of the vehicle to pay the charge or make ‘formal representations’ against the PCN. If the council rejects the keeper’s formal representations they may appeal to London Tribunals.
- Miss X informally challenged the PCN but the Council rejected her challenge. She says she used a third party service to pay for parking but it did not record her full vehicle registration number. The Council agreed to cancel another PCN in similar circumstances but said it would not do so again. Miss X believes this is unfair.
- The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. If Miss X disputes the PCN and is unhappy with the Council’s decision not to cancel it, it would be reasonable for her to follow the appeals process set out above. The appeals process, set out in law, is free and relatively easy to follow and London Tribunals can consider Miss X’s comments about the third party service in deciding whether to direct the Council to cancel the PCN.
Final decision
- The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Miss X to appeal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman