Summary: Mr X complains the Council did not properly deal with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) causing financial loss. The Council gave Mr X contradictory information and passed Mr X’s case to enforcement agents before a deadline to pay had expired. Mr X suffered financial loss. The Council will apologise, allow Mr X to pay the PCN at the original reduced rate, pay Mr X £200 for time and trouble, ensure he is not liable for any enforcement charges in relation to this PCN and train relevant staff.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complains the Council failed to deal with a PCN properly because it didn’t allow him the chance to settle the charge at a reduced rate as it had offered.
2. Mr X says he has suffered financial loss.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. When considering complaints, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we look at the available relevant evidence and decide what was more likely to have happened.
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
7. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law, guidance and policies

8. If a motorist breaks moving traffic rules, they might receive a fine. This fine is called a Penalty Charge Notice.
9. The authority will send the notice to the person who appears to own the vehicle (usually the registered keeper) by post. The notice will show the fine amount and how to appeal.
10. The motorist has 28 days from the date of the notice to pay the fine or ‘make representations’ against it.
11. The fine is usually halved if it is paid within 14 days in London or within 21 days outside London.
12. If the authority rejects the appeal, the motorist can appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. 
13. The authority can issue a charge certificate which increases the fine by 50% if:

• the fine is not paid;
• the motorist does not appeal against the fine; or
• the appeal is not successful.

14. If the fine is still not paid, the authority can register the debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court. The authority can then ask enforcement agents (bailiffs) to collect payment for the fine and the bailiff’s costs.
15. The motorist can apply to the TEC to ask them to cancel the registration of the debt. They do this by filling in a witness statement or statutory declaration.
16. If the motorist is successful, the TEC might order the authority to go back to an earlier stage which will reduce the fine and they will not have to pay the bailiff’s costs. It might also give them back their right to appeal.
17. If the motorist is too late to make a witness statement they might be able to ask the TEC to look at their application ‘out of time’. If the TEC will not look at the application ‘out of time’ they might be able to ask them to review their decision.

What happened?

18. This is a brief chronology of key events. It does not contain everything I reviewed during my investigation.
19. Mr X was issued with a PCN by the Council in March 2024. He appealed the PCN and this was rejected.
20. The Council says it initially told Mr X following an online enquiry he could pay the PCN at the reduced rate of £65 if paid by the end of August 2024. The Council accepts it subsequently stated the reduced rate could be paid up until the end of October 2024.
21. Mr X attempted to pay the £65 charge. The Council closed Mr X’s case and passed it to enforcement agents before the end of October 2024.
22. The Council advised Mr X to appeal to TEC. He did so, but TEC could not accept the application. It was refused in February 2025.
23. Mr X complained to the Council in March 2025. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint.
24. Mr X complained to the Ombudsman.

Analysis

25. I have seen copies of all communication between Mr X and the Council about the PCN. This includes a copy of the email sent by the Council on 30 August 2024 to Mr X offering him the ability to pay the PCN at £65 until 31 October 2024.
26. The Council accepts it closed Mr X’s case and was passed to enforcement agents on 21 October 2024, 10 days before the expiry of the stated deadline.
27. Mr X says he tried to pay the reduced amount of £65 but the Council’s systems shows the amount outstanding as £130 and would not let him pay £65. Mr X further says he tried to contact the Council about this and received no response.
28. The Council says it originally was unable to locate any discount payment offer allowing Mr X to pay £65 by 31 October. It says the last discount payment offer was made on 14 August 2024 which was valid for 14 days only.
29. The Council itself provided a copy of the email, relied on by Mr X, to the Ombudsman, in response to my enquiries.
30. The Council told the Ombudsman that, “Mr X would not have been able to make a payment to the Council as of 21 October 2024 as we have put in place a payment block. This is in place to stop customers later trying to make payment to us after they received bailiff demands.”
31. I have seen a copy of an email from Mr X to the Council dated 31 October 2024 raising the issue with it about having tried to pay the PCN at the reduced rate and having been unable to do so. He did not receive a response to the email.
32. After further consideration and investigation of its systems, the Council now accepts it offered Mr X the opportunity to pay the PCN at a reduced rate until 31 October 2024 but closed his case before this period had expired. The Council has confirmed this was an isolated error where an officer accidentally referred to October instead of August. This is fault by the Council. Mr X suffered financial loss because he was unable to pay the reduced PCN charge and has subsequently incurred enforcement agent charges.
33. The Council told the Ombudsman, “Neither enquiries or complaints form part of the Statutory Process for disputing a penalty charge.”
34. Mr X was challenging the payment process of the Council, and not the PCN itself. The Council assumed anything PCN-related is for the statutory process when this issue clearly isn’t. I consider this to be a misconceived action as the TEC would not be able to deal with the matter Mr X was complaining about.
35. The Council should have dealt with this through its complaint process in the first instance. This is fault by the Council. Mr X appealed to TEC unnecessarily as a result, suffering time and trouble attempting to resolve the matter.

Back to top

Action

36. To remedy the outstanding injustice caused by the fault I have identified, the Council will take the following action within 4 weeks of this final decision:
• Apologise to Mr X. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
• Allow Mr X to pay the PCN at the original reduced rate.
• Pay Mr X £200 for his time and trouble with respect to making both multiple representations including to TEC.
• Withdraw Mr X’s case from the enforcement agents and ensure Mr X is not liable for any enforcement charges in relation to this PCN.
• Provide training to staff concerning when issues should be referred to TEC and when they should be dealt with by the Council’s complaints process.
37. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Decision

38. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed actions to remedy injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman