Tunbridge Wells Borough Council (24 015 211)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 02 Dec 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for a parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

  1. Mr B complains the Council issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention. Mr B says the Council has not displayed adequate signs in this location which means it is not clear to motorists how to comply with the parking payment requirements. Mr B says this has caused him a year of stress and he would like the Council to improve the signs.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The Act 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)
  3. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr B.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. A motorist who receives a PCN for a parking contravention has two options. The motorist may pay the PCN to cancel it. Or, the motorist may challenge the PCN by making formal representations, and if needed, putting in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for authorities outside London).
  2. It is the role of the tribunal, not the Ombudsman, to decide disputes about whether a PCN was correctly issued. This includes deciding whether signage in a particular location is sufficient.
  3. Rather than pay this PCN, I find it was reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The tribunal had the power to decide the issue Mr B complains about and cancel this PCN.
  4. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings