Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the escalation of a penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to ask the court to consider his case.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he heard nothing further about a bus lane penalty charge notice (PCN) until contact from the Council’s enforcement agents. Mr X says he entered the bus lane in an emergency when he was driving to hospital after having cut his hand. Mr X wants the Council to apologise and repay the money he has paid to clear the PCN.

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. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Parliament has provided a procedure by which Mr X could have challenged the Council’s enforcement of the PCN, that is, by asking the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to consider his case. While I recognise Mr X considers it unreasonable to expect him to do this, as this is the procedure provided by law, I do consider it reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed it and we will not therefore investigate. My understanding is that this avenue remains open to Mr X even though he has paid the PCN.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have followed the procedure provided in law to challenge the Council’s enforcement of the PCN.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman