Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a penalty charge notice for an alledged parking contravention, or pounding the complainant’s vehicle. This is because the recipient of a notice, and whose vehicle has been pounded, has a right of appeal to a statutory tribunal. It would be reasonable for the complainant to exercise that right of appeal and as such, we have no jurisdiction to investigate this complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant (Miss K) complains the Council wrongly issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN) in respect of a parking contravention. In particular, she says she did not know about the parking restrictions due to inadequate signage. She therefore says there is no basis for the Council to have issued a PCN, as well as the pounding of her vehicle.
2. In summary, Miss K says the alledged fault has caused financial hardship, stress and uncertainty. As a desired outcome, she wants the Council to release her vehicle, withdraw the PCN and ensure appropriate signage is put in place which highlights parking restrictions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended). London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to adjudicate the validity of PCNs issued by local authorities. We also have no powers to order a PCN be cancelled. The recipient of a PCN in London has a right of appeal to London Tribunals and I note the Council has informed Miss K of this. This is the body Parliament established in order for such disputes to be resolved and I see no evidence it would be unreasonable to expect Miss K to exercise her right of appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the restriction I outline at paragraph three (above) applies.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman