Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals about the matter.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained the Council failed to send her correspondence about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to the correct address.
2. Mrs Y says this led to her car being clamped by bailiffs and the costs increasing as she was unaware of the penalty increases.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information Mrs Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs Y says she received initial correspondence about a PCN while she lived at a property for approximately six weeks. However, after she moved, she did not receive anything further, until she was contacted by bailiffs who clamped her vehicle. Mrs Y says she had to pay over £700 to bailiffs. Mrs y is seeking a refund of the amount paid.
8. Mrs Y has a right to submit a late witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. If the TEC accepts Mrs Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mrs Y’s right of appeal against it to the Council initially and then the London Tribunals. Mrs Y can then decide if she wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty. The TEC can also order the Council to refund Mrs Y the costs for the bailiff’s actions.
9. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mrs Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals about the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman