Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a moving traffic contravention. There is nothing to suggest fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr B complained the Council would not cancel a penalty charge notice for a moving traffic contravention because he is a carer.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not provide a right of appeal against a council’s decision. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the Mr B and the Council. I have also considered Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council enforces moving traffic restrictions and takes recovery action using procedures set out in the London Local Authorities and Transport for London Act 2003. The Council and motorists must follow these procedures although the Council has discretion to stop enforcement or recovery action if it believes there are good reasons to do so.
6. The Council issued the penalty charge notice to Mr B because it believed he had driven where this was not allowed. The penalty charge was £130 although the Council could accept £65 if Mr B paid within 14 days.
7. Mr B wrote to the Council asking it to cancel the penalty charge notice because he is a carer. The Council sent him a ‘notice if rejection’ which said it had decided not to cancel the penalty charge notice. It explained he could either appeal to an independent adjudicator on certain grounds or pay the penalty charge. It also offered him the discount and Mr B paid £65. The Council then closed the case.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is nothing to suggest there was fault in how the Council dealt with the penalty charge notice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman