Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Authority (TfL) increased the penalty amount on a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) despite it having previously agreed to reduce the penalty after his daughter, the vehicle keeper, was out of the country for several weeks when the PCN was issued to her home address.
2. Mr Y said he paid the penalty, at £240 as he wanted to ensure that the penalty stopped increasing and no enforcement action was taken at the time.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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 no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y told us when he approached us that he was seeking a reduction in the penalty paid from £240 to the original PCN charge of £80. TfL has now refunded £160 to Mr Y, reducing the penalty to £80. As Mr Y has admitted liability for the PCN, the remedy TfL has already made is sufficient. As we are satisfied with the actions already taken by TfL we will not investigate this complaint.
7. Further, Mr Y has also asked us to recommend that TfL send its PCN correspondence by email, rather than by post. TfL is however, required by law to send its correspondence to the registered keeper by post. Consequently, we cannot achieve this outcome as part of our investigation. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman