Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice that the Council issued to Mr Y. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr Y to have followed the statutory process and appealed to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains the Council issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) that he says he is not liable for. Mr Y says he submitted evidence to the Council which he believes shows he is not liable for the PCN. Mr Y complains the Council has ignored this evidence and continued taking enforcement action against him.

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. The London Tribunals can then consider parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y was issued a PCN in Autumn 2024. He challenged this, but the Council issued a notice of rejection in Winter 2024. Mr Y has evidence that he says shows he is not liable for the PCN. However, the Council has explained why it has not accepted Mr Y’s representation. If Mr Y disagreed with this decision, he could have appealed to the London Tribunals. I consider it would have been reasonable for Mr Y to use his right to appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to The London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman