Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s delayed response to his request/appeal about a parking fine. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Court to make a late statutory declaration.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the Council’s delayed response to his request it reinstate the initial amount of a £65.00 penalty rather than the increased amount of £130.00. He says the response he received did not address his points but escalated the process to the next stage by issuing a charge certificate.

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 could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. If Mr X wishes to challenge the Council’s escalation of the PCN process it would be reasonable for him to make a declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Court. If his application is successful the TEC can take the process back to an earlier stage, reinstating his right of appeal against the PCN and reducing the amount of the PCN to the original rate. If the TEC refuses his application he may request a review. In any case, while the TEC considers Mr X’s application the Council’s enforcement agents (bailiffs) cannot continue to pursue the debt or visit Mr X’s home.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the TEC to make a late statutory declaration.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman