Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about four Penalty Charge Notices. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, wants a refund for four Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) the Council issued in error. He also says the Council did not respond to his complaint. Mr X wants a refund and a report of unanswered complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes an update from the Council. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. It is the responsibility of the registered keeper of a car to pay or challenge a PCN. When a car has been leased to a driver, the leasing company will usually be the registered keeper. The lease agreement should explain the process, between the driver and the company, for dealing with any PCNs incurred during the period of the lease. The company can tell a council if it wants responsibility for a PCN to be transferred to the driver. Councils can then contact the driver and seek payment or a challenge from them. If this does not happen then councils can only correspond with the registered keeper (the company) and only the keeper can decide whether to pay or appeal.
5. Mr X leases a car. He is not the registered keeper. Mr X drove into a prohibited street, four times, and the Council sent four PCNs to the lease company. The company paid all the PCNs. Mr X says the company then charged him for each PCN and an administration fee.
6. Mr X complained to the Council but says it did not reply. Mr X reported that he has an exemption which means he is allowed to drive in the prohibited street.
7. The Council told Mr X that PCN disputes cannot be dealt with by the complaints team.
8. The Council could not correspond with Mr X about the PCNs because he is not the keeper. But, it re-considered the case and saw there had been an error because Mr X has an exemption. The Council contacted the company to say it had cancelled the PCNs; it issued a full refund to the company. Mr X will need to contact the company about the refund and the administration fees.
9. There was an error by the Council; it issued PCNs even though Mr X has an exemption. However, there is a statutory process to enable people to challenge PCNs and there is no suggestion of fault in the way the Council followed this process. Mr X is not the keeper so the Council could only deal with the company. The keeper could have challenged the PCNs but chose to pay and did not ask the Council to transfer liability to Mr X. The Council correctly notified the company of the PCNs, accepted payment from the firm, and issued a refund to the firm.
10. If Mr X thinks he is out of pocket, then this is a matter he would need to raise with the company. Mr X could check if he and the company dealt with the PCNs in accordance with the lease. I cannot comment on the lease agreement, and I cannot ask the Council to refund the administration fee as that is a matter between Mr X and the firm.
11. Mr X also complains about the Council’s complaints handling. This does not need an investigation because the Council told him the complaints process cannot address PCN disputes.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in relation to the processing of the PCNs.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman