Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because Ms X has applied to the court to challenge the Council’s actions and we cannot recommend the Council reimburses her costs.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council escalated a penalty charge notice (PCN) and pursued her for payment despite her having already paid the penalty charge.

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 courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X paid the PCN in May 2023 but gave the wrong PCN reference so her payment was not allocated to the case. The Council therefore progressed the PCN and escalated it to the next stage in the process.
8. Ms X says she sent copies of her bank statements but did not receive a response until several months later. By this point the Council had added additional charges and Ms X had not paid anything more, so the Council registered the unpaid PCN as a debt with the TEC and instructed enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from her.
9. The Council says it received notification from its bailiffs regarding Ms X’s payment in April 2024 and, using the information provided, it traced the payment she had made for the PCN in May 2023. It recalled the case from the bailiffs and closed it on the basis Ms X had already paid.
10. One month later, Ms X applied to the TEC to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case on the grounds she had made representations against the PCN but not received a response. The Council advised the TEC that the case had been closed and says the TEC neither granted nor refused the application. Ms X then applied for a review of its decision, which the TEC accepted.
11. Ms X is unhappy she had to go through the court process and wants the Council to reimburse her costs, pay her compensation and apologise.
12. However, as set out at Paragraph 4 we cannot investigate because Ms X has been to court about the matter. We cannot therefore recommend any remedy for her as the injustice she claims relates to the issue she has asked the TEC to consider, and to her costs for taking the matter to court.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Ms X has applied to the TEC to make a statutory declaration.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman