Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing and escalating a penalty charge notice for a moving traffic contravention. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to have contacted us sooner, and to have used the court remedy which was available to him.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he was issued with a penalty charge notice (PCN) for entering a yellow box junction. He says it is difficult to judge the flow of traffic in this particular location, and he did not receive the initial communication about the PCN.

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. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. In addition, the law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could have taken 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)
5. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from local authorities to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge local authorities’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs.
6. 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)
7. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included the Council’s response his complaint.
9. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

The PCN process

10. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for moving traffic contraventions. When a council identifies a contravention it will issue a PCN to the owner/registered keeper by post. This will detail the amount of the fine and the motorist’s right of appeal, firstly to the council itself and then to a Tribunal; in this case London Tribunal.
11. The motorist has 28 days from the date of the notice to pay the penalty charge or make representations against it. For the first 14 days after the PCN the motorist may pay at a discounted rate of 50% of the full fine.
12. If the motorist does not pay the PCN or challenge it, or if their representations are unsuccessful, the council may issue a charge certificate increasing the amount of the penalty charge by 50%. If the charge remains unpaid the council may then register the debt with the county court and serve an order for recovery, providing a basis for action by enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from the motorist.

Mr X’s case

13. The 12-month time restriction detailed in paragraph 3 above appears to apply to Mr X’s complaint. This is because he contacted the Council in late-2022 about the PCN and the Council replied on 9 December 2022, explaining what he needed to do if he wanted to challenge the PCN. Yet Mr X did not contact the Ombudsman until March 2024. I am unaware of any good reasons why he was prevented from contacting us sooner, so we will not start an investigation into this late complaint now.
14. And even if this time restriction did not apply, the other restriction detailed in paragraphs 4 and 5 above would still be relevant. This is because if Mr X did not receive the early enforcement letters/documents, then (upon receipt of the Order of Recovery) he could have applied to the TEC to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case. If the TEC had accepted Mr X’s application, it could have ordered the Council to take the process back to an earlier stage, removing the basis for any surcharges and additional fees, and reinstating his right of appeal against the PCN. This procedure exists specifically to deal with scenarios where something has gone wrong with the enforcement process, and I see no reasons why Mr X should not be expected to have used it. The Ombudsman would therefore not investigate the complaint, because it is reasonable to expect him to have used the court remedy which was available to him.
15. It is open to Mr X to contact the TEC to see if he can still use this process.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have contacted us sooner, and to have used the court remedy which was available to him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman