Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council gave misleading information about eligibility to pay the discounted amount for a penalty charge notice it issued to Mr X. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained he considered the Council misled him into believing he could pay the discounted amount of £65 for a penalty charge notice (PCN) but continue to challenge it. Mr X wants the Council to refund the full amount of £130 he says he was forced to pay.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council sent Mr X a notice of rejection of his representations against the PCN explaining he could pay the discounted amount of £65 within 14 days of the date of the notice of rejection or appeal to London Tribunals.
6. Mr X paid the Council £65 but also submitted an appeal to the Tribunal, which was rejected. Mr X then paid a further £65 to clear the PCN. Mr X considers the wording of the notice of rejection indicates that if £65 is paid within 14 days that it will be accepted unconditionally and that no further payment would be due. I disagree with Mr X as I consider the notice of rejection clearly indicates that either the discounted payment can be made or an appeal to the Tribunal, at which point £130 would be due if the appeal was rejected.
7. I have not seen evidence of Council fault therefore and as such there are not grounds for us to pursue this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman