Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because Miss X has used her right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and there is not enough evidence of fault in its escalation of the case.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council ignored the fact she received its response to her representations against a penalty charge notice (PCN) late. She says the Council told her to appeal, which she did, but in doing so she lost the ability to pay the PCN at the discounted rate of £30. She did not pay the full amount owed (£60) so the Council has now escalated the case and referred the matter to its enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from Miss X. Miss X says she has asked a court to consider the matter but has received no response.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right but cannot investigate if they have already used it. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. 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

6. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

Background

7. The Council issued Miss X a PCN for driving in a bus lane on 4 November 2022. Miss X challenged the PCN by making representations to the Council on 9 November 2022 but the Council decided not to cancel it. It sent Miss X a notice of rejection on 15 November 2022 but Miss X did not receive it. She chased the Council by email and received a copy of the Council’s rejection by email on 5 December 2022.
8. Miss X was unhappy with the Council’s decision and complained about it. The Council referred Miss X back to the appeals process and suggested she appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, which she did. However, because Miss X said she had not received the original notice of rejection, and as a gesture of goodwill, it agreed to extend the period she could pay at the discounted rate of £30. Its email was clear this offer applied for 14 days from the date of the email, until 20 December 2022.
9. Miss X did not pay the PCN; she says she could not afford to pay and she did not agree with the PCN, so she appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The Tribunal refused Miss X’s appeal in January 2023 and ordered Miss X to pay £60.
10. Following the Tribunal’s decision Miss X tried to pay the PCN at the discounted rate of £30 but the Council’s website did not allow this. This was because the Council’s offer to accept the lower amount had expired and the full amount was therefore due. Miss X has since sought to judicially review the Traffic Penalty Tribunal’s decision in an attempt to pay the PCN at the discounted rate. But the Council’s offer has long since expired and it is under no obligation to offer the discount again. We have no jurisdiction to consider any complaint about the court’s consideration of Miss X’s judicial review application.

Miss X’s case

11. We cannot investigate any complaint about the issue of the PCN or the Council’s decision not to accept Miss X’s representations against it. This is because Miss X has used her right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The restriction set out at Paragraph 4 above therefore applies.
12. Miss X has had several opportunities to pay the PCN at the discounted rate. I understand Miss X could not afford to pay at the time and do not doubt this was the case. But the Council’s decision not to reoffer the discounted rate is not fault. The Council used its discretion to reduce the amount payable by Miss X in December 2022 and the Tribunal ordered her to pay the full amount in its decision. Miss X has not paid the £60 owed and the Council was therefore entitled to register the unpaid PCN as a debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court.
13. The Court is satisfied the PCN is payable and that surcharges have been correctly applied. The Council was therefore entitled to pass the case to its bailiffs to recover payment from Miss X.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council in its escalation of the case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman