Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council wrongly charged him for a penalty charge notice (PCN). He wants the Council to refund this charge.

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 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council issued a PCN to Mr X and, because he did not appeal against the PCN or pay the penalty charge, it increased the amount of the charge and registered the unpaid PCN with the court. Mr X did not receive the PCN so he challenged the Council’s escalation of the case with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). The TEC accepted Mr X’s challenge and issued a revoking order.
6. This revoking order did not cancel the original PCN; it simply took the process back to the first stage of the process. Mr X paid £204 to the Council for the PCN, but he says he made a further payment of £204 by mistake.
7. The Council says it issued Mr X two PCNs and has received payments from him of £204 for each. It confirms it has refunded Mr X £139 for the PCN that was revoked, this being the difference between the original discounted rate of £65 and Mr X’s payment of £204. But Mr X’s application to challenge its escalation of the second case was refused. It has therefore accepted Mr X’s second payment of £204 in settlement of that PCN.
8. It appears the Council has complied with the TEC’s decision. There is nothing to show the Council has wrongly taken any other payment from Mr X that it should refund. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman