Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about several penalty charge notices. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal to London Tribunals which it would have been reasonable for him to use.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about several penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued by the Council for parking contraventions. He says his car was in the garage for repair works and he was away on holiday when the Council issued the PCNs. He has provided evidence of the repair works and his holiday but the Council has refused to cancel the PCNs.

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 Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for parking contraventions and handling appeals against them. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal; appeals at this stage are known as ‘informal challenges’.
8. If the motorist submits an informal challenge to a PCN and the Council decides not to accept them, it will write to the motorist and explain why. If the motorist accepts the Council’s reasons they may pay the PCN; if not, they may wait for a ‘notice to owner’. This provides a further opportunity for the owner of the vehicle to pay the charge or make ‘formal representations’ against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to London Tribunals.
9. If the motorist does not pay or make formal representations the council will issue a charge certificate, increasing the amount payable by 50%. It may then apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court to register the debt, before instructing enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover it.
10. Mr X says he did not see the original PCNs and could not therefore make an informal challenge. But the documents he has provided show he had returned from holiday by the time the Council issued the notices to owner and he could therefore have made formal representations at the time. Had the Council refused Mr X’s representations it would then have been reasonable for him to appeal to London Tribunals.
11. Mr X did not however do this, and he did not pay the PCNs, so the Council escalated the cases and issued charge certificates. Mr X has recently contacted the Council to dispute the PCNs but he is now outside the period for representations and the Council is therefore entitled to disregard them.
12. The complaints process is not an alternative to the appeals process and it is not for us to decide if the Council should cancel the PCNs. London Tribunals is better placed to decide whether the Council correctly issued the PCNs and if there are good reasons to cancel them. It would therefore have been reasonable for him to follow the appeals process if he wished to challenge the PCNs.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman