Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Authority has issued three Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) to him, but he did not receive the PCNs until after the penalties had increased to a total of £750. He is also unhappy with the lack of response to his complaint from the Authority.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him upset and concern.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal about the same matter. 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)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
6. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
    

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information Mr Y and the Authority provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr Y says he was not aware of the PCNs until they had already progressed passed the stage in which he could make representations to the Authority. This is one of the reasons a person may appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove a Charge Certificate, or in this case three Charge Certificates. Mr Y can do this by submitting an out of time statutory declaration to the TEC.
9. If the TEC accepts Mr Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCNs and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Authority initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
10. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
11. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, it is not a good use of our public resources to investigate the way the Authority dealt with the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman