London Borough of Haringey (24 011 999)
Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 03 Dec 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the clamping and removal of her vehicle, during which she alleges Council Enforcement Agents caused damage. This is because it would be reasonable for Miss X to take this matter to court. She also has a right of appeal against the original Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) the Council issued.
The complaint
- Miss X complains about damage to her vehicle after it was clamped and towed away by Enforcement Agents acting on behalf of the Council. Miss X also complains the Council did not have accurate information about the location of removed vehicles online, which added to her distress as she could not find where her vehicle had been taken. Miss X wants the Council to provide her with the Enforcement Agent’s video footage to prove it did not damage her vehicle. She also wants the Council to award compensation for the damage, refund the fees she incurred and allow her to pay the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) at the original reduced charge rate.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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)
- 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)
- London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
- 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)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- The Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to Miss X in early 2024. The Council transferred recovery of the unpaid PCN to its Enforcement Agent in summer 2024. The Enforcement Agent started recovery action in early July 2024 and sought to enforce a warrant of control a few weeks later. This involved clamping and removing Miss X’s vehicle.
- Miss X complained to the Council about the Enforcement Agent’s handling shortly after this. The Council apologised that its website did not include information about how to locate a removed vehicle in all circumstances and it committed to updating this. We cannot achieve anything more in respect of this part of Miss X’s complaint.
- The Council explained it could not deal with any claims for alleged damage to Miss X’s vehicle by Enforcement Agents through its complaint procedure. It advised Miss X to pursue this claim directly with the Enforcement Agent.
- We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint of damage to her vehicle. We cannot decide whether any organisation, be that the Council directly or a company acting on its behalf, has been negligent and we have no powers to enforce an award of damages or compensation. We would usually expect someone in Miss X’s position to seek a remedy in the courts, directly or via her insurers.
- Miss X has the right to submit a late statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (“TEC”), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. The TEC is part of the courts.
- If the TEC accepts Miss X’s application, it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reinstating Miss X’s right of appeal against it to the Council first and then the London Tribunals. Miss X can then decide if she wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
- I have seen no information to show it is not reasonable to expect Miss X to go to court if she wishes to challenge the original PCN or any charges associated with this.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because:
- we could not add anything further to the response the Council has already given about its website;
- it would be reasonable to expect Miss X to use her right of appeal against the PCN with TEC and then the London Tribunals; and,
- any claim for damages to Miss X’s vehicle or compensation should be taken to court, either directly or via insurers.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman