Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) he received for entering Bristol’s clean air zone without paying the relevant charge. He says he did pay the charge and has provided evidence of this to the Council, but it has declined to cancel the PCN.

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 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)
4. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s claim that he paid the clean air zone charge is essentially a challenge to the validity of the PCN; if Mr X paid then the contravention did not occur and the PCN should be cancelled.
7. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal is the appropriate body to consider Mr X’s challenge to the PCN and I have seen no good reasons to exercise our discretion to investigate the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman