Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr Y has complained the Authority (TfL) wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to him for entering the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) when he had paid the daily charge.
2. Mr Y says he has needed to take time off to have documents signed by the court.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y says he had already paid the daily charge for the ULEZ and therefore should not have received the PCN. However, Mr Y says he did not receive the earlier correspondence about the PCN. Mr Y says he was unaware of the PCN until he was contacted by the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), based at Northampton County Court, where the penalty debt had been registered by TfL in line with the PCN process. He has since tried to provide his evidence to the TEC, showing he paid the charge.
8. However, the TEC has said to Mr Y it is unable to process his documents as the forms need to be witnessed. Mr Y says this process has meant he has needed to take time off work.
9. While Mr Y has already submitted a statutory declaration to the TEC to ask it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. It is now for the TEC to decide if it will accept Mr Y’s application and whether or not it will take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN. It is also able to reinstate Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Authority initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty at a lower rate.
10. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal, even where he needs to have documents witnessed. This is his responsibility as a driver if he wishes to challenge the issuing of the PCN. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman