Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for a bus lane contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr X to appeal the notice through the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council wrongly charged him twice for the same driving offence. He said the Council told him he entered a bus lane on two occasions and issued two separate penalty charge notices (PCN) which he strongly denies.
2. Mr X stated the situation caused him avoidable distress and placed financial pressure on his family. He wants the Council to conduct a full review of the case and cancel the disputed debt resulting from the second PCN.

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 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)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
6. 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)
7. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for moving traffic contraventions. When a council identifies a contravention it will issue a PCN to the owner/registered keeper by post. This will detail the amount of the fine and the motorist’s right of appeal, firstly to the council itself and then to a Tribunal.
11. The motorist has 28 days from the date of the notice to pay the penalty charge or make representations against it. For the first 14 days after the PCN the motorist may pay at a discounted rate of 50% of the full fine.
12. If the motorist does not pay the PCN or challenge it, or if their representations are unsuccessful, the council may issue a charge certificate increasing the amount of the penalty charge by 50%. If the charge remains unpaid the council may then register the debt with the county court and serve an order for recovery, providing a basis for action by bailiffs to recover payment from the motorist.
13. Mr X committed a driving offence by entering a bus lane. He accepted responsibility and paid the PCN at the reduced rate within 14 days. The Council says shortly after the first offence, Mr X entered the bus lane again. It issued a second PCN for this offence. When Mr X didn’t respond, a charge certificate was issued.
14. Mr X then contacted the Council, denying a second offence. He also submitted a witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), stating he hadn’t received the second PCN. However, the TEC said the Council hadn't yet registered the case.
15. Mr X wrote to the Council seeking clarification. The Council replied, confirming both PCNs were issued in September 2024, with no response to the second. It issued a charge certificate in October, and registered the case with the TEC about four weeks after Mr X’s initial contact. In a letter to Mr X, the Council told him he could still submit a witness statement form (TE9) to the TEC to challenge the PCN.
16. Mr X did not submit a witness statement to the TEC at this stage. Had he done so and been successful, the TEC could have ordered the Council to reissue the PCN. This would have given him the opportunity to pay the PCN or appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal the PCN through the TEC at this stage, so we will not investigate this complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to appeal the notice through the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman