Transport for London (25 012 077)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 05 Feb 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the relevant tribunal about the matter.

The complaint

  1. Mr X has complained Transport for London (TfL) wrongly issued a penalty charge notice (PCN) to him for entering the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) without paying the charge. He says he followed signs directing him to a route that should have avoided the Low Emission Zone. He said the signs were not sufficiently clear and confusing. Mr X says the PCN is invalid for these reasons.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. 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)
  3. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X says he followed signs directing him to a route that should have avoided any ULEZ charges. He said the signs were not sufficiently clear and confusing. Mr X says this means the PCN is invalid. He says he challenged the PCN with TfL, but it refused to accept this challenge.
  2. After TfL rejected the challenge, Mr X had the right to appeal this rejection to London Tribunals. London Tribunals was set up specifically to deal with disputes about PCNs issued within Greater London and if it found in Mr X’s favour it could have ordered TfL to cancel the PCN.
  3. I have seen no good reasons why Mr X could not have appealed to London Tribunals. So, I will not exercise my discretion to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.

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