Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s use of false or misleading photographic evidence as part of the penalty charge notice appeals process. This is because it is reasonable to challenge a penalty charge notice with the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and any vehicle owner may raise their concerns about the validity of the Council’s evidence with the Adjudicator. We have no jurisdiction to investigate complaints about the evidence provided by the Council to the Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council is using false photographic evidence as part of the appeals process against penalty charge notices (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. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Where the Council issues a PCN for a parking contravention the owner/registered keeper may make representations against the PCN and then appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. If therefore Mr X, or the owner of any vehicle issued a PCN, disputes the Council’s decision to refuse their representations it would be reasonable for them to appeal.
8. Where the owner of the vehicle has already appealed, any complaint about the Council’s handling of the appeal falls outside our jurisdiction as set out at Paragraph 4.
9. If Mr X or any other motorist feels the Council has provided false evidence in support of a PCN they should draw their concerns to the attention of the Tribunal and allow the Adjudicator to rule on the validity of the evidence it has received.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X has a right of appeal against any PCN issued by the Council and it would be reasonable for him to use this right. If Mr X believes the Council has provided false evidence to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal as part of an appeal he should bring his concerns to the Adjudicator’s attention and it would then be for them to decide whether the Council’s evidence is valid.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman