Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s complaints handling and procedures. This because I have not seen enough evidence of a significant injustice that warrants an investigation by us.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains that the Council has not followed its complaints process properly. She says the Council missed its own deadlines in responding to two of her complaints.
2. Miss X would like the Council to reimburse the costs she incurred to get a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) cancelled. This includes solicitor’s fees and postage costs for letters she sent to the Council and the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC).
3. Miss X also complains that the Council did not consider her vulnerabilities and disabilities under the Equality Act 2010.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X complains that the Council has not followed its complaints processes properly. She said complains that the Council did not take her disabilities into account, and it therefore failed to meet its Equality Act duties.
8. She also wants the Council to compensate her for the costs she incurred to get her PCN cancelled.
9. Whilst I acknowledge Miss X’s concerns, I note Miss X’s complaints to the Council initially arose from the way the Council issued a PCN and pursued her for payment. The Council eventually agreed to cancel the PCN.
10. Although the Council may have handled her complaints poorly, this alone does not amount to a significant injustice. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
11. I also note the Council have already told Miss X that they will not reimburse her the costs she incurred get the PCN cancelled.
12. Miss X complained that the Council failed to take her disabilities into account. Whilst I appreciate her frustration, I can see that the Council apologised to Miss X for wrongly issuing a PCN and explained how the error occurred.
13. However, if Miss X believes the Council has breached its the Equality Act duties, she may take the matter to court.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because there is not enough evidence of a significant injustice in failings in the complaints procedure alone that warrants an investigation. And we cannot determine whether the Council has breached the Equality Act as this is a matter for the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman