Summary: Mr X complained the Council sent Enforcement Agents to his home to recover charges for an unpaid Penalty Charge Notice from 2019 against a car he did not own, without any notice. Mr X said the Council ignored his letters and complaint about the matter. There was fault in how the Council identified Mr X as responsible for the debt and in how it communicated with him. The Council agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £150 to recognise the distress caused to him when it took unnecessary and avoidable enforcement action against him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council sent Enforcement Agents to his home to recover charges for an unpaid Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) from 2019 against a car he did not own, without any notice. Mr X said the Council ignored his letters and complaint about the matter. Mr X said Enforcement Agents attending his home caused him distress, and the Council’s complaint handling caused him frustration and time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. Where an individual, organisation or private company is providing services on behalf of a council, we can investigate complaints about the actions of these providers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 25(7), as amended)
4. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I read the documents provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him on the telephone.
7. I read the documents provided by the Council in response to my enquiries.
8. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

The relevant guidance and legislation

9. The ‘Guidance for local authorities on enforcing parking restrictions’ is the framework councils must follow for civil parking enforcement. It states where a driver has committed a parking contravention a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) must be fixed to the vehicle. The owner is responsible for paying the charge.
10. If the penalty charge is not paid within the time specified, the council should issue a notice to owner to ensure they know about the charge. This should be issued within 28 days of the PCN.
11. If there is no satisfactory response to a notice to owner within 28 days, the council should issue a charge certificate. The charge certificate tells the owner the penalty charge has increased, and action will be taken through the County Court if it is not paid within 14 days. The owner of the vehicle has a right to respond to the charge at each stage.
12. Where the charge is not paid, the council can apply to the Court for a warrant to recover the debt owed. This can include taking control of goods to cover the value of the debt. The council can direct enforcement agents to act on its behalf to recover the debt owed by the owner of the car. The council remains responsible for decisions on the debt such as to accept payment plans or put a hold on recovering the debt.
13. The Tribunal Courts and Enforcement Act 2007 states seven days before an enforcement agent visits the debtor to take control of goods, they must issue a notice of enforcement. Schedule 12 of the act says an enforcement agent can enter premises they believe the debtor lives at to take control of goods.
14. The ‘London Council’s code of practice on civil enforcement’ states where the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) does not have information on the owner of the vehicle, the authorities should use all available avenues to identify an owner. It states it must take care ‘not to enforce against an innocent party, bearing in mind the possibility of a vehicle being cloned or something similar’.

What happened

15. In 2020 Mr X lived at address B. He stated he had lived there for more than ten years. Mr X had never owned a car or had a driving licence.
16. In December 2019 the Council issued a PCN to car Z for a parking contravention.
17. In January 2020 the Council said it completed a check with the DVLA. The DVLA said car Z was registered to address Z and to a man with the same name as Mr X.
18. Between January and September 2020 the Council stated it sent a notice to owner, a charge certificate, a pre-debt letter and an order for recovery of unpaid penalty charges to address Z. The Council did not receive a response to the letters it sent to address Z.
19. In November 2020 the Council obtained a warrant for a Mr X at address Z to recover the debt owed for the PCN. The Council passed the warrant to the Enforcement Agents to enforce.
20. The Enforcement Agents completed a DVLA check on the car which did not provide any new information. In December 2020 an Agent visited address Z. The record shows they spoke to Miss L who was not the owner of car Z. Miss L did not provide a forwarding address for the previous occupant.
21. On the same day the Enforcement Agent’s case record shows an entry recording address B. There is no record of how it identified address B or how it was relevant to the case. There are no records of any enquiries made about this address. The Enforcement Agents applied for the Court to reissue the warrant to address B.
22. In January 2021 the Enforcement Agents sent a compliance notice letter to address B. Mr X received the compliance notice and immediately contacted the Enforcement Agents and the Council. He stated he lived at address B but had never owned a car or held a driving licence. He stated it was a case of mistaken identity. He asked the Council to disassociate his details from the PCN and to tell the Enforcement Agents to remove his personal data from its database.
23. The Council told the Enforcement Agents to put a hold on enforcement action.
24. In February the Council wrote to Mr X and stated the DVLA had his name and address as the registered keeper. It stated it would suspend enforcement until the end of March to allow Mr X to ask the DVLA to amend its records. The Council said it sent the letter to address Z.
25. Mr X had already made his own enquiries with the DVLA. The DVLA sent Mr X a letter that said ‘I’ve checked our records and can confirm that your name and address is not recorded under the current or previous keeper details. We have received an application in the name of [Mr X] however at a different address.’ Mr X sent this letter to the Council in February.
26. In April the Council said it wrote to Mr X and told him he had provided the DVLA with the wrong address when he made his enquiries. It stated Mr X should have used address Z as that is where he used to live. It said Mr X should write again to the DVLA using address Z and provide the confirmation to the Enforcement Agents as the Council was no longer dealing with the matter. It also stated enforcement action was no longer on hold. The Council sent the letter to address B and the Council said it also sent it by email. Mr X stated he did not receive this letter.
27. In August 2021 the Council told the Enforcement Agents to continue with enforcement action. The Enforcement Agents visited address B. The Agent left a letter telling Mr X they would reattend to recover goods to pay the outstanding debt. Mr X contacted the Council and the Enforcement Agents. He again explained he did not own a car and provided the DVLA letter proving the same.
28. The following day Mr X wrote to the Council and stated he wanted to raise a formal complaint. He said:
• he was being persecuted for someone else’s debts;
• the Council had not responded to his contacts or the evidence he had provided; and
• he wanted the Enforcement Agents to remove his information from their database.
29. Mr X also complained to us.
30. In September the Council sent Mr X a letter which stated, ‘I can confirm that these matters are now closed and enforcement action has been ceased.’
31. In response to our enquiries the Council stated it dealt with the matter as a service query rather than a complaint.
32. In response to my enquiries the Enforcement Agents stated Miss L provided Mr X’s new address as address B. The case record shows the Enforcement Agents added this information to the case record after my enquiry.

My findings

33. The Council followed the correct procedure in issuing the PCN and the following letters to address Z, where car Z was registered. It followed the correct procedure in handing the account to the Enforcement Agents.
34. The Enforcement Agent stated the new tenant of address Z provided address B. However, its contemporaneous records stated the new tenant did not provide a forwarding address. Mr X stated he has never lived at address Z. The Enforcement Agents did not complete any checks to verify if this was the correct address or the correct Mr X before issuing the compliance notice. That was fault and not in line with the London Council’s code of practice. It caused Mr X distress when the Enforcement Agents contacted him about a debt that was not his.
35. Mr X did not receive any of the documents sent to address Z, because he had never lived there. When Mr X became aware of the issue in February 2021, he told the Council he was not the owner of car Z and provided supporting evidence. I have seen no information that supports the Council’s assumption Mr X previously lived at address Z. The Council should have made further checks to corroborate Mr X’s supporting evidence. It did not and that was fault and caused Mr X distress when the Enforcement Agents visited him six months later.
36. The Council stated it wrote to Mr X in February and in April 2021 and asked for further evidence he was not the owner. It said it sent both letters by email and post. When it did not receive the evidence, it continued with enforcement action. The Council sent the first letter to address Z which Mr X had already informed it he did not live at. Mr X stated he did not receive the second letter, or either letter by email. Mr X had responded to all other communication he received from the Council or Enforcement Agents immediately. I have seen no evidence the Council sent the letters by email. So, Mr X believed the matter was closed in February. The Council’s poor communication was fault and caused Mr X frustration when the Enforcement Agents contacted him again in August.
37. Mr X was clear he was raising a formal complaint with the Council in August 2021. The Council did not seek to investigate the complaint or offer Mr X a formal complaint response. That was not in line with our principles of effective complaint handling and was fault. This caused Mr X further frustration and uncertainty about how the error had occurred and if there would be any future consequences.

Back to top

Agreed action

38. Within one month of the final decision the Council agreed to:
• write to Mr X and apologise for the distress, frustration and uncertainty caused to him by the faults outlined above;
• pay Mr X £150 to recognise the distress caused to him; and
• ensure the Enforcement Agents have appropriate methods to verify names and addresses identified during enquiries and remind it to use those methods in all cases.
39. The Council will provide us with evidence it has completed the recommendations.

Back to top

Final decision

40. I have completed my investigation. I found fault leading to injustice and the Council agreed to my recommendations to remedy that injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman