Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken, we could not add to the investigation by the Council, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to him, failed to issue a Notice to Owner and did not respond to his representations against the PCNs or to his complaint. Mr Y also said he had issues accessing the CCTV evidence of the alleged contravention.
2. Mr Y says this caused him upset and worry and meant he was unable to appeal the PCN.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
5. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

7. Mr Y complained to the Council after he received a PCN and had made representations against it but did not receive a response. Mr Y says he did not then receive a response to his complaint and as he had not received a Notice to Owner was unable to appeal to the London Tribunals.
8. The Council responded to Mr Y’s complaint, apologising for his experience and cancelling the PCN, meaning that no charge was owed. Mr Y then approached us.
9. As the Council has properly considered the complaint, it is unlikely the Ombudsman would be able to add to the original investigation. Further, the Council has offered a proportionate and appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by its fault by cancelling the PCN and apologising to Mr Y. As this is in accordance with our guidance on remedies, it is unlikely further consideration of this complaint would lead to a different outcome, and we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.
10. As we are not investigating the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council dealt with and responded to Mr Y’s complaint. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because we are satisfied with the actions the Council has taken, we could not add to the investigation by the Council, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman