Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to use his right of appeal.

The complaint

1. Mr X disputes a penalty charge notice (PCN) he received from the Council for entering a Controlled Parking Zone outside of permitted times. He disputes this because the says the Council’s evidence shows him leaving, not entering and it did not show the signs displayed when he entered the zone. He says he felt forced to pay the charge of £80 rather than appeal as if unsuccessful he would have to pay the non discounted rate of £160.
2. Mr X says the Council’s handling of his complaint was poor because it advised him in its stage two response it could not consider his complaint because he had a right of appeal to the Environment and Traffic Adjudicator (London Tribunals). He says it should have advised him earlier.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council regarding the matters set out in paragraph 1.
6. The Council responded at stage one of its procedure and advised that both entry and exit at restricted times were not permitted. It said the signs were double sided and provided adequate notification to motorists at all points of entry and exit. It did not agree to refunding the payment of £80 Mr X had paid.
7. At stage two if the complaints procedure the Council said it could not consider his complaint as he had a statutory right of appeal to the independent adjudicator (London Tribunals). The Council noted he had paid and explained how he could request a refund and appeal. The Council also provided photos showing the signage in both directions.
8. Mr X’s complaint concerns his dispute about the Council’s evidence to support its PCN. It is reasonable to expect him to appeal to the Tribunal about this as it is the appropriate body to consider the matter.
9. Mr X complains he felt forced into paying the discounted rate of £80 as he did not want to pay a further £80 due to making an appeal. However, the rate is set in accordance with regulations, and it is a decision for the individual whether or not to appeal.
10. Mr X says the Council’s complaint handling was poor. However, we do not investigate complaint handling where we are not considering the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have appealed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman