Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because we are satisfied with the actions the Authority has taken and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Authority has repeatedly written to his address and sent bailiffs to his home about Penalty Charge Notices (PCNS) incurred by a car incorrectly registered at his address under a stranger’s name.
2. Mr Y says he does not know the individual and does not own the car committing the contraventions and feels distressed by contact from both the Authority and by bailiffs about the matter. Mr Y says he feels the issue has cost him financially and emotionally as well as his time dealing with the matter.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y and the Authority provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y received several letters after his address was used to register a vehicle with the DVLA incorrectly. Mr Y says he does not know the person who had registered the vehicle at his address and had no links with the vehicle. He informed both the DVLA and the Authority of this when he became aware of the issue but continued to receive correspondence about PCNs from the Authority and was contacted by bailiffs. Mr Y says this caused him worry, frustration and upset and he complained to the Authority.
7. The Authority has, following the complaint process, explained it is required to send correspondence to the address registered with the DVLA for a vehicle at the time of the contravention. It advised Mr Y to raise the issue with DVLA and agreed to stop sending correspondence about PCNs for the vehicle to Mr Y’s address where it was able to.
8. The Authority also referred Mr Y to the police if he felt there was any issue of fraud and in its final response confirmed he was not liable for the penalties as he was not the registered keeper of the vehicle. The Authority also apologised for the issue and its delay in resolving it as well as the concern caused to Mr Y, by offering him £150.
9. The Authority has offered a proportionate and appropriate remedy for the concern Mr Y says he suffered, which is in line with our own guidance. Consequently, it is unlikely further consideration of this complaint would lead to a different outcome, and we are satisfied with the actions the Authority has taken in the complaint. We will therefore not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions the Authority has taken, and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman