Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council sent correspondence about a penalty charge notice (PCN) to the wrong address. He believes this amounts to a breach of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) and is unhappy the Council escalated the case and instructed enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from him.

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 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.
5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. It is clear Mr X did not receive the Council’s correspondence about the PCN but the Council has told Mr X that the way to challenge its escalation of the case is by applying to the TEC to make a late witness statement. If the TEC accepts Mr X’s application it may order the Council to take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount he owes and reinstating his right of appeal, should he wish to use it. The process is free and relatively simple to use and it would therefore be reasonable for Mr X to use it.
8. While Mr X believes the Council’s actions may amount to a breach of the GDPR this is an issue for the Information Commissioner, rather than the Ombudsman. It is not for us to decide if there has been a data breach and I have not in any event seen any evidence to show the alleged breach has adversely affected Mr X. If it has done, Mr X may apply to the courts for damages.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the TEC to make a late witness statement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman