Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about signage and Penalty Charge Notices. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal any remaining Penalty Charges to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council has failed to ensure signage and road markings in various places are sufficiently clear to warn drivers of potential contraventions. This has resulted in Mr Y receiving several Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) for which he has had to pay over £500.
2. Mr Y says without rectification of the problems drivers are unfairly fined and he is concerned about road safety and compliance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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.
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 provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr Y disputes the validity of the PCNs the Council has issued. His reasons for this include the poor quality of road markings, obstructed and tampered signage, which he says make it unclear what restrictions are in place. He considers the PCNs he has received unfair as a result. However, he has now paid the penalties, despite his disagreement with them, instead of using his right to appeal it to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. If Mr Y has felt that the signage or road markings were inadequate to meet the requirements, it is for him as the driver and recipient of the PCN to challenge this.
9. In deciding not to appeal and paying the penalty, Mr Y has legally accepted his liability for the penalty and the validity of the PCN itself. Consequently, in doing this, he has accepted that the signage and markings are sufficient. As he has accepted its validity, it is unlikely we would now find fault and we will not investigate.
10. In the cases where Mr Y has not yet paid the penalties, he has a right to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for each of the PCNs if he has missed the original deadline to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. An application can be made for more than one PCN at a time. 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 Traffic Penalty Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
11. 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

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal any remaining Penalty Charges to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman