Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a parking contravention. The complainant had a right of appeal against the penalty charge and has twice sought a remedy in court regarding the recovery process. The Council has also exercised discretion to accept a reduced amount from the complainant to prevent further recovery action.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Miss B, has complained the Council is talking action to recover an unpaid parking penalty charge.

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.
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 law says we cannot investigate a complaint when someone has sought a remedy in court; we have no discretion in this. The restriction applies even if the court could not provide a remedy for all the claimed injustice. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Miss B said in her complaint. The Council has also provided background information.

Back to top

What I found

Background

6. The Council enforces parking restrictions and takes recovery action using procedures set out in the Traffic Management Act 2004 and associated Regulations. Councils and motorists must follow these procedures although councils have discretion to stop enforcement or recovery action if they believe there are good reasons to do so.
7. 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.
8. The Road Vehicles (Registration and Licensing) Regulations 2002 require the owner of a vehicle to immediately inform the DVLA of any change of address. It is an offence under the Vehicle Excise and Registration Act 1994 to use a vehicle where the correct address is not held by the DVLA.
9. Miss B had a right of appeal against the penalty charge notice to London Tribunals which is a statutory tribunal. An appeal to London Tribunals 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 3 would generally apply.

Summary of events

10. The Council issued a penalty charge notice to Miss B by post because it believed she owned a car which had been parked where this was not allowed. It sent the penalty charge notice to the address provided by the DVLA. The penalty charge was £130 although the Council could accept a discounted amount of £65 if Miss B paid within 14 days.
11. The Council heard nothing further and says it sent the required documents to the address provided by the DVLA. It eventually registered the unpaid penalty charge, which had now risen to £195, as a debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court. The TEC issued an order for recovery which allowed the Council to use bailiffs to collect the unpaid penalty charge, a court fee and their own fees from Miss B.
12. Miss B made a witness statement to the TEC to say she had not received the penalty charge notice (which also served as a notice to owner). The TEC accepted this and revoked the order for recovery. It did not cancel the original penalty charge.
13. The Council issued a new penalty charge notice but received no payment from Miss B. The Council again registered the unpaid penalty charge with the TEC and Miss B made a second witness statement. While the TEC accepted this, it did not cancel the penalty charge.
14. The Council issued a third penalty charge notice to Miss B. The current situation is Miss B has still not paid the penalty charge or sought to appeal to London Tribunals. She contacted the Council to say she had difficulties making the payment, which had again risen to £195. The Council has exercised discretion to accept £65 and has extended the period in which she can pay.
15. If Miss B does not pay, it is likely the Council will again register the unpaid penalty charge as debt with the TEC. It is doubtful she would have any valid grounds to make a third witness statement and so the Council would likely use bailiffs to recover the money from her. If this were the case, she would need to pay £513 comprising the £195 penalty charge, £8 court fee and £310 bailiffs’ fees.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I have decided we will not investigate this complaint. This is because Miss B could have appealed against the penalty charge notice to London Tribunals.
17. There is no fault in the Council seeking to recover the unpaid penalty charge and on two occasions Miss B has sought a remedy in court regarding not receiving the penalty charge notice. Further, the Council has exercised discretion to accept a reduced amount from her in order to prevent further recovery action.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman