Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because he was not liable for the penalty charge notice and does not have consent to complain on behalf of the person who was. The complaint is also late with no good reason to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN). He says the Council did not issue a Notice to Owner (NtO) and wrongly escalated the charge to enforcement agents after he filed a witness statement with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC).
2. He says the Council’s actions have caused distress and financial harm. He wants the Council to compensate him and refund him the escalated charge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council/care provider has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
7. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Assessment

8. Where a council issues a PCN and the recipient does not pay or successfully challenge it within the relevant period, the council may issue a NtO to the vehicle’s owner/registered keeper. If the registered keeper still does not pay or successfully appeal against the PCN, the council may register the debt with the court and instruct enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover the fine and bailiff’s costs.
9. If a registered keeper does not receive the NtO, they may apply to the TEC to cancel the debt registration by submitting a witness statement or statutory declaration.
10. The evidence I have seen shows Mr X is not the registered keeper. He is therefore not directly or significantly affected by the issue of the PCN or the Council’s handling and escalation of the case and has no right to make representations, appeal, or make a witness statement or statutory declaration to the TEC in his own right.
11. The Council says it did not receive notification from the TEC that the registered keeper submitted a witness statement. When Mr X later tried to complain to the Council about this, the Council said it could not engage with him because he was not the registered keeper and did not have consent to act on the registered keeper’s behalf. I consider this decision was appropriate and did not amount to fault.
12. Any injustice arising from the handling of the PCN would be to the registered keeper, not Mr X. Mr X has not provided evidence of consent to complain on the registered keeper’s behalf, either when he complained to the Council or when he complained to us. We therefore cannot investigate.
13. Mr X’s complaint is also late. As paragraph 5 says, we generally do not investigate complaints that are older than 12 months unless there are good reasons to do so. Mr X first became aware of the issue more than 12 months ago and I see no reason why he could not have complained to us sooner.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he is not directly affected by the issues he complains about and does not have consent to complain on the registered keeper’s behalf. The complaint is also late with no good reason to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman