Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Authority has wrongly pursued him for payment of a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) despite him providing evidence that his vehicle number plates had been cloned. He is also unhappy with the manner he was treated in when he complained to the Authority about the issue.
2. Mr Y says he had to pay over £350 for a penalty he should not have owed and has been caused considerable distress by the Authority and its enforcement agents.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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. 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)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
6. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr Y has a right to submit a late statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN if he has paid the penalty to a bailiff under duress. If the TEC accepts Mr Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Authority initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
9. The London Tribunals can also consider how the Council dealt with Mr Y’s appeal, and whether it followed the correct process in considering any representations. If it finds that it did not consider the representations properly, it can then consider the issues raised and the reasons why the PCN is either invalid or should not be enforced.
10. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
11. As we are not investigating the substantive matter, it is not a good use of public funds to investigate how the Council dealt with Mr Y after he raised complaints about the PCN. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman