Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains the Council has refused to cancel a penalty charge notice (PCN) she believes results from issues with the Council’s online permit application system.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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 (TPT) 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 Miss X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for parking contraventions and handling appeals against them. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal; appeals at this stage are known as ‘informal challenges’.
9. If the motorist submits an informal challenge to a PCN and the Council decides not to accept them, it will write to the motorist and explain why. If the motorist accepts the Council’s reasons they may pay the PCN; if not, they may wait for a ‘notice to owner’. This provides a further opportunity for the owner of the vehicle to pay the charge or make ‘formal representations’ against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
10. Miss X informally challenged the PCN but the Council rejected her challenge. It explained that if she wished to dispute the PCN further she should wait for the notice to owner to make formal representations. It is unclear if Miss X has done this but it would have been reasonable for her to do so. The appeals process is the appropriate way of challenging a PCN and the TPT can consider ‘mitigation’ as part of an appeal against a PCN for a parking contravention. Miss X could therefore have raised the fact she believed she had applied for a parking permit as part of her appeal.
11. The Council confirms Miss X has applied for a parking permit since it refused her informal challenge but it says the information she has provided in support of her application is insufficient to proceed. It has advised Miss X she will need to change her details with the council tax department and is waiting for Miss X to do this. This is a suitable way forward and it is unlikely we would recommend it do anything more at present.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal to the TPT.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman