Summary: Mr X complained about a Parking Charge Notice that a private enforcement agency, which the Council employs, issued. He says he paid for his parking, but it was not properly registered because of a faulty machine, and the Council has refused to resolve this. We have decided to end our investigation into Mr X’s complaint because he appealed the Parking Charge Notice to an independent appeals service.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about a Parking Charge Notice that a private enforcement agency, which the Council employs, issued. He says he paid for his parking, but it was not properly registered because of a faulty machine, and the Council has refused to resolve this. He also says the signage in the car park is wrong.
2. Mr X says the Council’s fault means he now has a debt against his name for an unpaid Parking Charge Notice.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information from Mr X and the Council.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. The Council owns Trosley Country Park. It employs a private enforcement agency, Contractor D, to manage the pay and display car park on its behalf.
7. Mr X parked his car in the car park. Contractor D sent him a Parking Charge Notice and said he had not paid for his parking. It said he would have to pay a fine of £70.
8. Mr X appealed the Parking Charge Notice to Contractor D. He provided evidence he paid for his parking. He also contacted the Council and said he wanted it to resolve the matter as the landowner. He said it was unfair it should penalise him for system errors.
9. Contractor D contacted Mr X. It said it had checked the pay and display machine and there were no transactions that matched his vehicle registration. This suggested there was a keying error. It said he would now have to pay an administration fee of £20, rather than £70. It said if he disagreed, he could appeal to an independent appeals service.
10. The Council sent a letter to Mr X. It said it appreciated issues occur when paying for parking. This is why it has an agreement with Contractor D to charge a £20 administration fee, rather than the full charge. It reminded him of his appeal rights.
11. Mr X appealed to the independent appeals service. The service rejected Mr X’s appeal and said the Parking Charge Notice was valid.

Back to top

Analysis

12. Mr X has appealed the Parking Charge Notice to an independent appeals service. The service is better placed, rather than the Ombudsman, to decide whether the Notice was properly issued. It also has powers to cancel the Notice. The concerns Mr X has raised about a faulty machine, and incorrect signage, would have been considered by the service before it made its decision. Therefore, there is no further role for the Ombudsman and we will end our investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I have ended my investigation and do not uphold Mr X’s complaint. This is because Mr X appealed the Parking Charge Notice to an independent appeals service. Therefore, there is no further role for the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman