Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complained the Council failed to respond to her representations in a timely manner and failed to provide her with a verification code to allow her to appeal the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to the London Tribunals.
2. Miss Y says the issue has caused her upset and worry and would like the Council to reconsider its rejection of her representations.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss Y has said she was unable to get a verification code for the PCN, which would have enabled her to appeal to the London Tribunals. A verification code is not required for this type of appeal and is only needed where a person is making an appeal about a parking contravention on privately owned land. Consequently, as she did not need a code to appeal, there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council not providing Miss Y with a code, to justify investigating.
6. Further, if Miss Y had needed a verification code, and had been prevented from appealing by not being able to obtain one from the Council, she would have had the right to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre on this basis to reinstate her right to appeal to the London Tribunals.
7. However, in this case, Miss Y has paid the PCN. In deciding not to appeal and paying the penalty, Miss Y has legally accepted her liability for the penalty and the validity of the PCN itself. As she has accepted its validity, it is unlikely we would now find fault in the Council’s enforcement process of the PCN. Has Miss Y felt she wished to appeal the PCN, it is for her as the driver and recipient of the PCN to challenge this through the appeal system at the London Tribunals. We will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman