Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a bus lane contravention. The complainant could have appealed to a statutory tribunal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mrs B, has complained about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council for a bus lane contravention.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. It 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered Mrs B said in her complaint and background information provided by the Council.

Back to top

What I found

Background

4. The Council enforces bus lanes and takes recovery action using procedures set out in the Transport Act 2000 and associated Regulations. The Council and motorists must follow these procedures.
5. In law, the owner of vehicle is responsible for any penalty charges regardless of who was driving at the time of the contravention. This is most often the person registered with the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) as the keeper of the vehicle. Enforcement authorities will initially send any formal documents using details provided by the DVLA.
6. Mrs B had a right of appeal against the penalty charge notice to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) which is a statutory tribunal. An appeal to the TPT is free and relatively easy to use. It is also the way in which Parliament expects people to contest a penalty charge notice. For these reasons, the restriction I describe in paragraph 2 would generally apply.

Summary of events

7. The Council sent a penalty charge notice to Mrs B because it believed she was the keeper of a car that had entered a bus lane during the hours of operation. The notice said she had to pay the penalty charge of £60 within 28 days although the Council could accept £30 if she paid within 14 days. If she wished to contest the penalty charge notice, she would need to make representations within 28 days.
8. Mrs B’s husband, who was driving at the time, emailed the Council to say why he did not think he should have to pay the penalty charge. The Council responded the next day to say he was not the registered keeper so it could not discuss the case with him.
9. As the Council received no representations from Mrs B within 28 days of the penalty charge notice, it continued recovery action and issue a charge certificate. The penalty charge had now increased by 50% to £90 in line with the regulations.
10. Mrs B continued to write to the Council but it explained it was too late to challenge the penalty charge notice. Mrs B then paid the required penalty charge and the Council closed the case.

Analysis

11. I have seen nothing to suggest the Council did not follow the correct procedure. If Mrs B wanted to contest the penalty charge notice, she should have made representations to the Council within 28 days of receiving the penalty charge notice. She could then have appealed to the TPT if the Council rejected these and I do not consider any fault by the Council prevented her from doing so.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I have decided we will not investigate her complaint. This is because it was reasonable for Mrs B to have appealed to the TPT and so the restriction I describe in paragraph 2 applies.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman