Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr to X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to make a late witness statement/ statutory declaration.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he has been issued with five penalty charge notices (PCNs) by Transport for London (TfL). He says he has made representations against these PCNs but did not receive a response from TfL. TfL then instructed its enforcement agents (bailiffs) to collect £2500 in fines.
2. Mr X says he has been caused distress and he has incurred costs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. 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.
6. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mr X says he did not receive a response to his representations, he has a right to submit a late statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. If the TEC accepts his application it may order TfL to take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr X’s right of appeal against it to the Authority initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr X can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
10. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr X has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right to appeal.
11. Further, the Tribunal has been set up for the purpose of considering the type of issues Mr X has raised and has the power itself to cancel the PCNs if warranted. It is therefore better placed than the Ombudsman, who can only ask the Authority to consider cancelling the PCNs, to consider this complaint. We will therefore not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. It is reasonable for Mr X to challenge the Authority’s decision with the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman