London Borough of Enfield (25 008 095)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 08 Sep 2025

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. There is because there is insufficient evidence of fault or significant injustice to warrant further investigation.

The complaint

  1. Miss X says the Council issued her a penalty charge notice (PCN) and failed to properly consider her informal challenge and her subsequent complaint. She says this caused her frustration and distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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, or
  • any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement,

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the Miss X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Miss X says the Council issued her a PCN and did not properly consider her informal challenge.
  2. In response to Miss X’s challenge, the Council declined to cancel the PCN but agreed to accept payment at the discounted rate of £80. Miss X says the Council’s response did not address the points she made in her challenge but the response explained why it would not cancel the PCN and the Council clearly took account of Miss X’s circumstances in exercising its discretion to reduce the amount of the penalty charge.
  3. Miss X has now paid the PCN at the discounted rate of £80 to avoid further escalation and this amount is not significant enough to warrant further investigation.
  4. Miss X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault and the injustice Miss X claims is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

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