Summary: Mr B complained the Council gave him wrong advice when he telephoned about making representations and paying a penalty charge notice. He said that as a result he lost the opportunity to pay at the discounted rate. There was no fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. I refer to the complainant as Mr B. He complained the Council gave him wrong advice when he telephoned about making representations and paying a penalty charge notice (PCN). He said that as a result he lost the opportunity to pay at the discounted rate.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
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 Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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 considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

The Road User Charging Schemes Regulations 2013

7. The charging authority has a duty to consider representations made to them within 28 days of the road user receiving the PCN. The authority must consider the representations within 56 days.
8. If the authority rejects the representations made it must tell the road user of their right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
9. Where an appeal is allowed, the adjudicator may instruct the charging authority to refund any money already paid for a PCN. This means that appeals can be considered, regardless of whether a PCN has been paid.

The Council’s policy

10. The Council introduced a clean air zone with penalties for vehicles driving in the zone that do not meet the emission standards and where payment is not made within the specified period.
11. The Council applies a fixed penalty charge of £120 and will discount this charge by 50% if a person pays the penalty charge within 14 days. People can challenge the PCN but if it is unsuccessful then the full amount must be paid. If the challenge is unsuccessful, they will not be entitled to pay at the reduced rate but can submit an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
12. At the time of the events Mr B complained about, the Council would not consider representations made after it received payment at the reduced rate. It changed this practice in December 2021, following the Ombudsman’s recommendation on another case.

What happened

13. Mr B drove in the clean air zone without paying the applicable charge. He did this twice, the first time in mid-July and the second in early August. Mr B said he was unaware of the zone and the first he knew of it was when he received the PCN for the first incident, which was after the second time he had driven in the zone. He contacted the Council and was allowed to pay the charge and the PCN was cancelled. He then received a PCN for the second incident.
14. Mr B made representations to the Council explaining the situation and asking if he could again pay the charge and the PCN be cancelled. Mr B said he also phoned the Council and was told that he should wait to hear about the response to his representations and that he would still be able to pay at the reduced rate
15. The Council has no record of that phone call but there is a note of a call in early September. That records Mr B was advised that it was still in progress. I would understand that to be the consideration of his representations were still being considered.
16. The Council rejected his representations at the end of September. When Mr B contacted the Council he was told he would have to pay the full charge which he did shortly after. He then complained that he had lost the option to pay at the reduced rate because the Council had delayed in dealing with his representations and had wrongly told him that he could wait for that decision and would still be able to pay at the reduced rate.

Analysis

17. The Council had 56 days to consider Mr B’s representations. It made its decision within that time so there was no delay. The crux of Mr B’s complaint was the information he was given in a phone call he made to the Council when he received the PCN. The Council does not have a record of that call and Mr B has not been able to provide any more detail such as when the call was made, who he spoke to or his own phone records. Without some evidence I cannot say there was fault by the Council.
18. The PCN Mr B received explained that payment had to be made within 14 days to pay at the reduced rate. When he next contacted the Council that period had already expired.
19. Mr B was rightly told in the Council’s rejection of his representations that he could appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. It would have been reasonable for him to do that. That would have considered his representations and could have meant that his payment would be refunded.

Back to top

Final decision

20. There was no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman