Summary: We will not investigate Mr X complaint about a penalty charge notice. Mr X had a right of appeal which it would have been reasonable for him to use.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council took enforcement action against an unpaid penalty charge notice (PCN). Mr X also complains of poor communication and complaint handling.

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. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
5. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
6. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from local authorities to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge local authorities’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. In February 2024 the Council issued Mr X a PCN for entering and stopping in a box junction when prohibited. The PCN was sent to the address Mr X had his car registered to.
10. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal; appeals at this stage are known as informal challenges. If the Council decides not to accept an informal challenge, the motorist can make formal representations against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to London Tribunals.
11. If the motorist does not pay or make formal representations the council will issue a charge certificate, increasing the amount payable by 50%. It may then apply to the TEC to register the debt, before instructing enforcement agents bailiffs to recover it.
12. Had Mr X wished to challenge the PCN it would have been reasonable for him to appeal under the statutory process set out above. The complaints process does not amount to a further opportunity to challenge a PCN and the Council’s refusal to deal with this point further after the time for an appeal had passed does not indicate fault.
13. If for any reason Mr X had not received the notice to owner, he could have contacted the TEC for advice on applying to make a late witness statement. This process allows motorists to challenge a council’s escalation of a PCN and, if successful, the TEC may order the Council to take the PCN back to an earlier stage, removing the basis for any surcharges or bailiff fees and reinstating their right of appeal against the PCN.
14. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. Mr X had a right of appeal which it would have been reasonable for him to use.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman