Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s late complaint that the Council mishandled his challenge against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and related enforcement action. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has mishandled his challenge against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) issued to him in 2023. He says he has submitted evidence to the Council which he believes shows he had a valid parking ticket for the time the contravention occurred. He complains the Council has ignored this evidence, which then led to his car being clamped. He wants the Council to stop enforcement action and to compensate him for the injustice caused by its mishandling.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from local authorities to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge local authorities’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs. The London Tribunals can then consider parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X received a PCN from the Council in Summer 2023. He says he has submitted evidence to the Council which he believes shows he had a valid parking ticket for when the PCN was issued. Mr X has shared this evidence with us, and it appears to cover the period shortly prior to and after the time the Council say the contravention that led to the PCN occurred. The Council says it has explained this to Mr X.
9. Non-payment of the PCN has led to Mr X’s car being clamped by Enforcement Agents the Council instructed to recover the debt. If Mr X continues to believe the Council should not have issued the PCN, he has the right to submit a late witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. If the TEC accepts Mr X’s application, it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr X’s right of appeal against it to the Council initially and then the London Tribunals. It can also order the return of money Mr X may have already paid to get the clamp removed from his car while the process is ongoing. Mr X can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty, potentially at a lower amount.
10. The Council has told us it has not received a complaint from Mr X about this matter. It has also explained that it would no longer accept Mr X’s complaint as more than 12 months have passed since the events complained of occurred. Like the Council, we also usually expect people to complain to us within 12 months of the event. We can exercise discretion to consider a late complaint if there is good reason to do so. I have not asked whether there is a good reason in this case because it would be reasonable for Mr X to use his appeal rights with the TEC and then the London Tribunals. We are not an appeal body, and the court and tribunal are best placed to consider the matters Mr X raises. We will not investigate a complaint about the matter instead.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and if successful, to then use his statutory right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman