London Borough of Camden (24 020 019)
Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 19 Mar 2025
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal.
The complaint
- Miss X complains the Council issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN) for a parking contravention when she had a medical emergency.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
- 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)
- London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Miss X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- 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’.
- 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.
- Miss X disputes the PCN and has complained to the Council about it, but the Council declined to consider the complaint because the PCN carried a right of appeal.
- Miss X is unhappy the Council refused to cancel the PCN but the appropriate way to challenge it was to appeal under the process set out above. The complaints process is not an alternative to the appeals process and I am satisfied it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal.
Final decision
- We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to appeal under the process set out above.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman