London Borough of Havering (25 001 767)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 22 Jun 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

The complaint

  1. Miss Y complained the Council has wrongly issued her with multiple Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) for parking contraventions despite her having a business permit to park, which allows her to park in the residential bays in question.
  2. Miss Y says this has meant that she has had to make representations against the PCNs, some of which have been accepted, and others have not, leading to contact for some PCNs by bailiffs, causing her upset and worry.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  2. 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)
  3. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Miss Y has a right to appeal the outstanding PCNs further to the London Tribunals if she wishes. She can provide evidence of the PCNs she has successfully made representations against if she wishes. The London Tribunals can consider how the Council dealt with Miss Y’s appeal, and whether it followed the correct process in considering her representations. If it finds that it did not consider her representations properly, it can then consider the issues Miss Y has raised as the reasons why the PCN is either invalid or should not be enforced.
  2. Usually, a person must make an appeal to the tribunal within 28 days of a Notice of Rejection to representations being issued. As bailiffs have already been involved in Miss Y’s case, she will need to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre, based at Northampton County Court, to seek permission to appeal to the London Tribunals after the deadline. This can usually be done online.
  3. The London Tribunals and the Traffic Enforcement Centre are usually free in the initial stages and can make reasonable adjustments if necessary. I would therefore consider it reasonable for Miss Y to use her right of appeal. We will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Miss Y ’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

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