Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because Mr Y can reasonably be expected to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council issued PCN correspondence to a previous address after he moved house. Consequently, he did not receive the PCN correspondence until after the initial stages had passed and had to pay bailiffs approximately £600.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. 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. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y has a right to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN, explaining that due to the incorrect details being registered initially with the DVLA before Mr Y was able to change them, he was unable to make representations to the Council.
7. If the TEC accepts Mr Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Council initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty at the lower amount The TEC also has the power to order the Council to refund the penalty and bailiffs costs already paid while it considers any representations from Mr Y against the PCN.
8. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because Mr Y can reasonably be expected to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman