Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed it to the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about a parking penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by the Council for not parking within the markings of a bay. He says the markings for the parking bays were very faint so he thought he was correctly parked. Mr X says he overpaid the original parking fee due to incorrect signage. For these reasons, Mr X says the Council should reimburse the penalty charge paid because it should have never issued the PCN.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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)
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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• 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 provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. A motorist may pay a PCN to cancel it. Or, the motorist may follow the statutory representations and appeals process to challenge a PCN. This involves the motorist making formal representations to the local authority after receiving a Notice to Owner. If the local authority rejects these representations, the motorist may put in an appeal to the London Tribunals (for authorities inside London).
8. The Tribunal is independent and has the power to cancel a PCN. The process is free to use and relatively straightforward. We generally expect motorists to use this process if they consider a PCN was wrongly issued.
9. I recognise Mr X remains unhappy about the PCN, but he had the right to challenge it via the statutory appeal process that was available to him, ultimately to the independent London Tribunals. It is reasonable to expect him to have followed this process; we are not another level of appeal and cannot make the decisions of the London Tribunals.
10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that he overpaid the original parking fee based on incorrect signage at the car park. Mr X paid the PCN, but he wants the Council to reimburse him because he says the Council is administering the car park illegally. This is not an outcome that we can achieve. The substantive injustice to Mr X was the PCN and as explained, this could have been remedied by way of following the statutory appeal process.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed it to the London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman