Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Clean Air Zone penalties. Mr X has submitted witness statements to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and it is then reasonable for him to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to cancel all Penalty Charge Notices relating to a Clean Air Zone after he successfully appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. He said the Council had not returned his calls and he had received visits from enforcement agents. Mr X said he is vulnerable and the matter had caused him distress and exhaustion. He wanted the Council to cancel all PCNs and apologise.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. A Clean Air Zone (CAZ) is an area where an authority has made changes to improve the air quality. If a vehicle does not meet certain standards, the motorist must pay to drive in a CAZ. Authorities can fine drivers who do not pay the relevant CAZ charges. If a motorist does not pay the right fee for using certain roads, they might receive a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). The authority will send the notice to the person who appears to own the vehicle (usually the registered keeper) by post.
7. Mr X says he received several PCNs relating to a vehicle he no longer owned. The Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) told him the new owner had not yet notified it of a change of keeper.
8. Where the Council rejects an appeal, the motorist can appeal to an independent tribunal called the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT). Mr X indicates he successfully appealed some of the PCNs. However, each individual PCN would need to be appealed separately.
9. The authority can issue a charge certificate which increases the fine by 50% if:
• the fine is not paid;
• the motorist does not appeal against the fine; or
• an appeal is not successful.
10. If the fine is still not paid, the authority can register the debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court. The authority can then ask enforcement agents (bailiffs) to collect payment for the fine and the bailiff’s costs. Mr X says he has received visits from enforcement agents in relation to the PCNs that he had not appealed.
11. A motorist can apply to the TEC, by submitting a witness statement, to ask it to cancel the registration of the debt in circumstances including when the person did not initially receive the PCN or where a council has not responded to their appeal. If the motorist is successful, the TEC might order the authority to go back to an earlier stage which will reduce the fine. The motorist will not have to pay enforcement costs and their right of appeal will be reinstated. The Council says Mr X has now submitted witness statements to the TEC in relation to the outstanding PCNs, and says it is awaiting revoking orders.
12. The TPT can consider an appeal if the motorist did not own the vehicle when the fee should have been paid. Given this is the basis for Mr X’s challenge to the PCNs, it is reasonable for him to appeal all PCNs to the tribunal after the TEC issues revoking orders. We are not an appeal body, and the TPT is best placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has submitted witness statements to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and it is then reasonable for him to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman