Summary: We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint that she was wrongly issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Miss C to put in formal representations, and if needed, appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Miss C says the Council wrongly issued her with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention. Miss C says there were no markings or signs to indicate there were parking restrictions and she was not blocking a dropped kerb. Miss C says she paid the PCN at the discounted rate because she could not afford to risk the charge doubling. Miss C says the system which means a motorist pays double if they lose their appeal is flawed and extremely unfair.

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 Act 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. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Miss C.
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. If the local authority rejects these representations, the motorist may put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for authorities outside 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. Rather than pay this PCN, Miss C could have challenged it by using this process. I find it was reasonable for Miss C to do this and the Tribunal was in the best position to decide if this PCN was properly issued by the Council.
10. Local authorities are allowed to offer a discount for early payment of a PCN. This is not evidence of fault.
11. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss C’s complaint because it was reasonable for her to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman