Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s issue of a penalty charge notice and its failure to cancel the notice. This is because Transport for London has acknowledged its errors and offered Mr X £250, which provides a suitable remedy for the injustice he claims.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) wrongly issued him a penalty charge notice (PCN) for a vehicle he was no longer responsible for. He says TfL then agreed to cancel the PCN but failed to notify its enforcement agents (bailiffs), resulting in an unnecessary and distressing visit to his property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X, the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and Guidance on Remedies.

Back to top

My assessment

4. TfL acknowledges fault both in the issue of the PCN and in its failure to cease enforcement action by its bailiffs against Mr X. It has apologised to Mr X, cancelled the PCN and offered him £150 for the injustice this caused, later increasing this to £250 following further correspondence from Mr X.
5. Mr X does not accept TfL’s offer and says he wants £1,500 in compensation. He has based this figure on an award for damages made by a court in an unrelated case several years ago. But this claim related to breaches of the Protection from Harassment Act and Data Protection Act and it is not our role to enforce this legislation or award damages.
6. TfL’s offer is in-line with our Guidance on Remedies and previous recommendations we have made in similar cases, and I am therefore satisfied it represents a suitable remedy for the injustice Mr X suffered. It is therefore unlikely further investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X.
7. Mr X retains the option to make a claim against TfL at court if he wishes to obtain damages under the legislation referred to, but he may wish to seek legal advice if he decides to proceed with this.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because TfL has acknowledged fault in its handling of Mr X’s case and has offered him a suitable remedy for his injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman