Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council has agreed to reduce the amount of the penalty charge back to the discounted rate of £65 and any remaining injustice Mr X has is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to consider his disability and his concerns about its parking permit renewal system when rejecting his challenge to a penalty charge notice (PCN). It then refused to consider his late representations and escalated the case to the next stage, increasing the amount of the penalty charge. Mr X paid the PCN at the increased rate of £205 to avoid any further action but believes the Council should cancel the PCN. He says the Council’s actions caused him stress and financial loss, and he feels it discriminated against him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We cannot determine if the Council’s actions were discriminatory. Strictly speaking, its handling of Mr X’s representations and its escalatory actions were in accordance with the statutory process. It therefore maintains its position that it was not at fault for the way it dealt with the PCN in Mr X’s case.
6. The Council does however have complete discretion to cancel any PCN it issues at any time and for any reason it sees fit. I am not satisfied the Council properly considered its discretion in this case and I have therefore invited the Council to remedy the impact of its actions on Mr X.
7. The Council has declined to reinstate Mr X’s right of appeal against the PCN to allow Mr X to challenge it further with London Tribunals as the relevant appeals body. It has however agreed to accept payment of the penalty charge at the discounted rate of £65 as a gesture of goodwill, meaning it will refund Mr X £140.
8. In the circumstances I am satisfied this provides a suitable remedy for the complaint and that any remaining injustice Mr X has from the issue is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has agreed to refund part of Mr X’s payment for the PCN and any remaining injustice is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman