Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council wrongly issued and rejected his representations against three Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) to him despite him having a valid resident parking permit.
2. Mr Y says the Council later cancelled one of the PCNs when he appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal but has not cancelled the other. Mr Y says this has led to him spending time and effort in dealing with the matter and has caused him upset.

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 impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. We also cannot investigate a complaint if in doing so we would overlap with the role of a tribunal to decide something which has been or could have been referred to it to resolve using its own powers. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y has complained about three PCNs. I will refer to these as PCN A, B and C.
7. Mr Y has appealed PCN A to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal about the same matter. As Mr Y has used his right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal about the PCN, we do not have the power to investigate Mr Y’s complaint about this PCN. We cannot therefore investigate it.
8. Mr Y also made representations to the Council, as part of the statutory process for PCNs, against PCN B. The Council accepted these representations and is no longer enforcing the PCN. The Council has also cancelled PCN C as a gesture of goodwill. As these PCNs have been cancelled, regardless of the reasons for this, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, and no worthwhile outcome is achievable by our investigation.
9. We seek to put people back into the position they would have been in had any alleged fault not occurred. While Mr Y may have needed to spend time and effort in the matter, he is as a driver responsible for taking such action. Further, as the PCNs are now cancelled, we could not put him back into the position he would have been in, as this has already been done through the complaints and statutory process. Therefore, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman