Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to cancel a penalty charge notice following an appeal decision by London Tribunals. This is because the Council’s apology and cancellation of the penalty charge notice provides a suitable remedy for the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council issued a charge certificate for a penalty charge notice (PCN) which an Adjudicator had already cancelled. He says this caused him mental stress and inconvenience and wasted his time.

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 provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council accepts it should not have escalated the PCN and has apologised. It confirms it has cancelled the PCN as directed and its actions provide a suitable remedy for the complaint. It is therefore unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

5. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are satisfied the Council’s actions provide a suitable remedy for the injustice Mr X claims.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman