Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right of appeal to the London Tribunals and make a referral to the Information Commissioner about his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the way a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) was issued to him while he was collecting a passenger in his taxi. Mr Y says the enforcement officer hid behind bushes to observe him for too short a time and did not sign the PCN. He also says the Council has not fully responded to his requests for information.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him frustration and time spent on appealing the matter

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Mr Y and considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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’.
7. If the motorist submits an informal challenge to a PCN and the Council decides not to accept them, it will write to the motorist 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 owner of the vehicle to pay the charge or make ‘formal representations’ against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to the London Tribunals.
8. The Council issued a PCN to Mr Y in May 2021 when Mr Y said he was collecting a passenger in his taxi. Mr Y says the PCN was issued incorrectly and unjustifiably. He says he made an informal challenge to the Council within the initial 14 days. He is now waiting to receive a Notice to Owner from the Council after it rejected his informal challenge. Mr Y told us plans to appeal the matter further to the tribunal.
9. Since making his informal challenge Mr Y has also made a Subject Access Request and Freedom of Information request to the Council. He is unhappy with the responses. He has reported this to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).

Analysis

10. Mr Y has a right of appeal to the London Tribunals if he wishes to continue to appeal the parking penalty and has confirmed he intends to do this. He has also confirmed he has already been in contact with the ICO, so it is reasonable for him to pursue his complaint about accessing information to the ICO. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right of appeal to the London Tribunals and make a referral to the Information Commissioner about his complaint.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman