Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and Miss Y has a right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals which it is reasonable to expect her to use.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained that the Council wrongly issued Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) to her and have wrongly pursued her for the penalties after it refused to use its discretion to waive the penalties due to her financial difficulties.
2. Miss Y says she feels harassed and feels uncared for.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
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. 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)
6. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Miss Y complained the Council has wrongly issued PCNs to her. Miss Y has a right to appeal the PCNS, to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) initially and then the London Tribunals. If Miss Y wishes to challenge the penalties, it is for her to use her right to appeal.
9. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Miss Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect her to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
10. Miss Y has also complained the Council has refused to use its discretion to waive the penalties. The Council has referred to and considered its discretion. It has explained that it would not consider Miss Y’s circumstances as sufficient reason to waive the penalties and explained its reasons for upholding the PCNs. As it has considered its use of discretion, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and Miss Y has a right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals which it is reasonable to expect her to use.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman