Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. It was reasonable for Mr X to use his statutory right of appeal to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council wrongly issued him a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), then failed to provide information he requested and progressed to recovery action. Mr X said as he did not commit the contravention, this action was unfair and a County Court Judgement could adversely impact him financially. He wanted the Council to respond to his information request and cancel the PCN and associated recovery action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council issued Mr X a PCN for a moving traffic offence. He says he did not commit the offence. He wrote to the Council requesting evidence. The Council responded in line with the statutory procedures, treating Mr X’s message as representations, which it rejected. It told him his appeal rights.
7. Mr X said the Council should not have treated his message as representations against the PCN. However, the Council was not at fault for considering his message as representations, and we would be critical of it had it not taken that action.
8. Mr X told the Council “I have no reason to appeal as I did not commit any offence”. However, the onus was on Mr X to follow the procedures to appeal. An appeal was his opportunity to defend his case. We will not investigate this matter as it was for the tribunal to decide whether Mr X had committed the contravention. There is no good reason for us to consider the matter instead, because Mr X was aware of his right of appeal and chose not to use it. It would have been reasonable for him to do so.
9. Mr X did not appeal or pay the PCN. The Council therefore progressed the matter to the County Court in line with the statutory procedures.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to use his statutory right of appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman