Milton Keynes Council (24 012 875)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 23 Oct 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in formal representations, and if needed, appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

  1. Mr B complains the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for parking in a disabled parking bay. Mr B says this restriction was not clearly signed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The Act 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. 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

  1. I considered information provided by Mr B.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. We do not normally investigate a complaint that a PCN should not have been issued. This is because there is a statutory representations and appeals procedure which we generally expect a motorist to use.
  2. After receiving a Notice to Owner, the motorist may put in formal representations to the authority which issued the PCN.
  3. If the authority rejects these representations, the motorist may put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for local authorities outside London).
  4. The tribunal is independent and has the power to cancel a PCN. It is the role of the tribunal, not the Ombudsman, to decide if a PCN was correctly issued.
  5. The Council considered Mr B’s informal representations and was satisfied this PCN was correctly issued. I have not seen any information to suggest it was unreasonable for Mr B to wait to receive a Notice to Owner before putting in formal representations, and if needed, appealing to the tribunal.
  6. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings