Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal which it would have been reasonable for him to use. Further, the amount he paid for the penalty charge notice- £35- is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by the Council. He says he asked a civil enforcement officer (parking warden) to confirm he was allowed to park where he parked and they told him it was.

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 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 Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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’.
8. 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.
9. Mr X says he challenged the PCN at the first stage of the process but the Council refused his challenge. Had he wished to pursue the matter further it would have been reasonable for him to wait for the ‘notice to owner’ and appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. However, Mr X paid the PCN at the discounted rate of £35 and therefore lost his right to appeal. While I appreciate this is frustrating for Mr X it was his choice to pay the PCN and the amount he paid is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The amount he paid to settle the matter is in any event not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman