Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London, which he did not receive. This is because TfL has agreed to cancel the penalty charge notices and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X in this case.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) sent penalty charge notices (PCNs) to his property using an incomplete address. As a result he did not receive two of the three PCNs and was therefore unaware of them. When he found out about the PCNs he wrote to TfL to challenge them but TfL refused to consider his representations because he was too late.

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 effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Authority.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. TfL confirms it issued the PCNs to the address for Mr X provided by the DVLA. This is standard practice and is not fault. However it accepts that Mr X did not receive the two PCNs and that it did not advise Mr X to contact the DVLA as it would normally do. It has therefore agreed to cancel the PCNs and will be writing to Mr X shortly to confirm this.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because TfL’s agreement to cancel the PCNs provides a suitable resolution to the complaint and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman