Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Slough Borough Council (20 012 254)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 24 Mar 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the Council has cancelled it.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complained the Council was continuing to pursue him for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) he had paid.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 an investigation if the issue has been resolved. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

  1. Mr X paid for a PCN within a few days of receipt. He says he should have paid at the discounted rate of £30 but the Council charged £60. Initially Mr X accepted this. But, the Council continued to write to him requesting payment. The fine increased to £90 and was then registered in court. Mr X says that despite sending emails the Council would not accept he had paid the fine.
  2. Mr X complained. In response, the Council explained it had issued two PCNs. The one that Mr X paid in September was for a PCN for a contravention that occurred in June. And, due to the time that had passed, the discounted rate was not an option. The Council explained Mr X had not paid the other PCN which is why enforcement action continued and the fine escalated.
  3. The Council said it should have responded to Mr X in December before it registered the fine in court. Due to this error it cancelled the other PCN.


  1. I will not start an investigation because the Council has cancelled the second PCN and Mr X does not owe any money to the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I will not start an investigation because the Council has cancelled the PCN.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page