Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about two penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued by Transport for London (TfL). He accepts an earlier PCN but believes the second and third PCNs are duplicates which TfL issued in retaliation for his outburst to one of its staff.

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 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)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. PCNs issued for non-payment of the charge for using certain roads within London carry a right of appeal to London Tribunals.
7. London Tribunals can look at an appeal if:  
• the motorist did not own the vehicle when the fee should have been paid;  
• the charge was paid correctly;  
• the charge did not need to be paid; 
• the driver was using the vehicle without the owner’s permission;  
• the authority asked the motorist to pay more than it is allowed to under the rules; or  
• the motorist was driving a hire or lease vehicle and the hire car or lease car company signed an agreement to say they would pay any fines. 
8. Because Mr X believes the second and third PCNs are duplicates of the first and that he did not therefore need to pay the charge on these occasions, he may make ‘representations’ against the PCNs to TfL. If TfL refuses to cancel the PCNs it would then be reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.
9. I have seen nothing to show it would not be reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals and I have therefore decided not to exercise my discretion to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to make representations to TfL and appeal to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman