Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council and its enforcement agents during debt recovery action for an unpaid Penalty Charge Notice. This is because Ms X has used her right of appeal to a Tribunal. There is also not enough evidence of fault in any recovery action to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. The Council issued Ms X with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for driving in a bus lane. Ms X says she did not become aware of the PCN until the Council had passed her case to enforcement agents and they started recovery action. Ms X also says she felt harassed by the enforcement agents during a period of ‘Breathing Space’ which caused her stress and anxiety.

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. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (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 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

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X applied to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to challenge the PCN but the court rejected it. We cannot look at this part of Ms X’s complaint as she has already used her right to go to court. The law says we cannot investigate any matter that has been the subject of court action regardless of the result.
9. Ms X did not make any payment following the Notice of Rejection from the TEC, so the Council passed the case to an enforcement agency and issued an Order for Recovery. Ms X then made an out of time witness statement, and recovery action was placed on hold while this was considered by the court. However, the witness statement was rejected, so recovery action resumed.
10. Following this, Ms X entered an approved ‘Breathing Space’ period, a government scheme which provides 60 days respite from debt recovery action. It says enforcement agents must not make contact during this period other than to arrange a payment plan. Ms X says enforcement agents continued to contact her during this period. However, the agents could still contact her during the Breathing Space to try to arrange a payment plan which is what they appear to have done, if anything. I have not seen enough evidence of fault here to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because she has used her right of appeal in court, and there is also not enough evidence of fault by the Council or its agents to justify further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman