Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because Mr Y has already approached the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has issued several Penalty Charge Notice (PCNs) to a previous address after he pushed his non-motorised scooter in a pedestrian zone. He also complained the Council changed the reason for the PCNs, saying he had driven through the zone.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him significant upset and worry and he has had to pay PCN charges he should not owe.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
5. The courts have said that where someone has used their right of appeal, reference or review or remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
6. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council issued several PCNs in 2022 and 2023 to Mr Y’s previous address, as registered with the DVLA. Mr Y has challenged the PCNs, either through the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) based as Northampton County Court or through the London Tribunals. Mr Y has also in some cases paid for the PCN penalty.
9. Where Mr Y has paid the penalty, while he may disagree with it, he has legally accepted his liability for the penalty and the validity of the PCN itself. As he has accepted its validity, it is unlikely we would now find fault in the Council’s issuing and enforcement of the PCN so we will not investigate.
10. Where Mr Y has appealed either to the TEC or the London Tribunals, we do not have the power in law to investigate, as explained in paragraphs three and five. Consequently, we cannot investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because he has already approached the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman