Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice for a bus lane contravention. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to use the alternative court and a tribunal remedies which are available.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council gave him the wrong address to submit his representations against a penalty charge notice (PCN) for a bus lane contravention. He says he lost the opportunity to appeal against the PCN and the debt is now with the bailiffs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. The law also 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)
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 Mr X and the Council, which included their complaint correspondence.
7. I also considered our Assessment Code.

My assessment

8. Parliament has provided a mechanism by which motorists can challenge the enforcement of a PCN when they consider something has gone wrong in the process.
9. Mr X can therefore apply to submit an ‘out-of-time’ statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court, asking it to take the enforcement process back to an earlier stage. If the TEC accepts his application, then Mr X’s right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal, against the PCN itself, will be restored.
10. With reference to paragraphs three to five above, the Ombudsman will therefore not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to use his rights of appeal to court and a tribunal.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to use his rights of appeal to court and then a statutory tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman