London Borough of Lambeth (24 023 072)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 06 Apr 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice he received for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Mr C to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

The complaint

  1. Mr C complains the Council issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention. Mr C says this was a genuine mistake made by his customer who applied for a parking permit but did not enter his vehicle registration correctly. Mr C says the Council should have noticed this error and was wrong to issue this PCN, which he had to pay to cancel.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The Act 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)
  3. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Mr C.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. A motorist may choose to pay a PCN to cancel it or follow the process set out in law to challenge it. This involves the motorist making representations to the local authority which issued the PCN. If the authority rejects these representations the motorist may put in an appeal to London Tribunals (for local authorities in London).
  2. We generally expect this process to be used. The Tribunal is independent and in the best position to decide whether a PCN was correctly issued.
  3. Rather than pay this PCN, Mr C could have used this process to challenge this PCN. I find it was reasonable for Mr C to do this. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings