Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). There is insufficient evidence of fault in the decision to issue the PCN and Mr X had a right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre which he could have used if he wanted to dispute his liability for the amount charged.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains on behalf of her husband, Mr X. She said the Council has refused to refund charges Mr X paid after receiving a charge certificate for non-payment of the Council’s Clean Air Zone daily charge.
2. She says Mr X never received the Penalty Charge Notice before being sent the charge certificate and so should be refunded part of the charge. She also says information about appeals on the charge certificate is confusing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))

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). The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background

8. A person must pay a daily charge to drive into the Council’s Clean Air Zone, if their vehicle does not meet required emission standards. If a person does not pay the charge, the Council can issue a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
9. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs and handling appeals against them. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal to the council to challenge the charge.
10. If the motorist does not pay or make formal representations the council will issue a charge certificate, increasing the amount payable by 50%. It may then apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court to register the debt, before instructing bailiffs to recover it.
11. If the person disputes their liability for the charge, they can appeal to the TEC by submitting a statutory declaration and ask it to remove the charge certificate. If the TEC accepts the application, it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating the right to make representations to the Council against it. A person can then decide whether to appeal against it or pay the penalty charge.
12. When a person pays the penalty charge, this is considered a legal acceptance of the validity of the PCN and of liability for the charge.

What happened

13. When Mr X drove into the Clean Air Zone, he was unaware he had to pay the daily charge and so did not pay it. The Council issued Mr X a PCN, which Mr X says he did not receive. The Council escalated the case and issued a charge certificate. When he received the charge certificate, Mr X paid the charge in full.
14. Mrs X then contacted the Council to request a part refund of the charge on the grounds that Mr X did not receive the PCN, and so was denied the opportunity to pay at a reduced rate. The Council refused the request. It said if Mr X had wanted to appeal, he should not have paid the charge but should have contacted the Council for further advice. It would have told him to await the Council to register the debt with the TEC after which he could appeal and ask the TEC to reduce the charge back to its initial state.

My findings

15. We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X paid the penalty charge when he received the charge certificate and in doing so, accepted the validity of the PCN and his liability for it. As Mr X has now paid the charge, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s issuing of the PCN.
16. If Mr X found information on the charge certificate confusing, he could have contacted the Council for further advice. If Mr X wanted to dispute his liability for the charge, he could have waited for the Council to register the debt with the TEC and used his right of appeal. He could have appealed on the grounds that he did not receive the original PCN and, if successful, the TEC could have ordered the Council to reduce the penalty charge to its original amount. As he had a right of appeal, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault in the issuing of the PCN and Mr X had a right of appeal to the TEC if he had wanted to dispute his liability for the amount charged.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman