Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about parking penalties because Miss Y has already approached the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and the courts are better placed to deal with the complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council, and enforcement agents acting on the Council’s behalf, repeatedly took enforcement action for PCNs issued to her previous address, including clamping and damaging her vehicle before requiring payment. Miss Y then received an order from the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to have the PCN reissued, but when it was, the same issue occurred.

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 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In this case, Miss Y has approached the TEC, both initially and again following the re-issuing of the PCN to her previous address. As Miss Y has approached the TEC and submitted her late witness statement to the TEC, we do not have the power in law to investigate, as explained in paragraph three. We cannot investigate this issue.
7. Miss Y has also said that the enforcement agents damaged her vehicle, for which she had to seek repairs which she had to pay for, during the clamping of her vehicle. She is seeking the costs of the repairs to be reimbursed to her.
8. The legislation from which the Ombudsman takes their power also places some restrictions on what we may investigate. One of these concerns negligence claims about damage to property, such as that Miss Y has described. We cannot determine liability claims for negligence. These are legal claims which may only be determined by insurers or the courts.
9. We are not able to decide liability or award damages. Consequently, any claim for damages, such as costs for repairs, which Miss Y considers the Council to be responsible for, are matters more appropriately dealt with by the courts. We will not investigate this complaint.
10. Miss Y has also complained about the poor handling of her complaint by the Council. Where we are not able to deal with the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public resources for us to investigate how the Council dealt with a complaint. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We cannot investigate Miss Y’s complaint because she has already approached the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and the courts are better placed to deal with the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman