Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice and enforcement action. This is because he used his right to submit an out of time witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he did not receive the original notification about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). He says the Council allowed him to submit an appeal through its website but failed to respond and instead progressed enforcement action.

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 courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916).
4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. When a Council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal. If the motorist does not pay or make formal representations, the Council will issue a charge certificate and may then apply to the TEC to register the debt. The Council may then instruct enforcement agents to recover the debt.
8. The London Tribunals consider appeals against parking PCNs. When someone has a right of appeal to tribunal, we will not normally investigate the matter as it is usually reasonable for the person to use their statutory right of appeal. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body.
9.  Mr X did not appeal within the statutory period, and the Council therefore progressed to issuing a Charge Certificate and registering the matter with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). The TEC is a court.
10. Mr X says when he became aware of the PCN, he submitted an appeal on the Council’s website and received an acknowledgement. The Council says it could not accept an appeal because it had already issued a Charge Certificate.
11. Mr X then had the right to submit a witness statement to the TEC. If accepted, this would return the case to the stage at which the person can appeal or pay the original fine. We would normally expect someone to use this right, rather than complain to us.
12. Mr X submitted an out of time witness statement, which the TEC is considering.
13. Where a person has used their right to refer the matter to a court, the law says we cannot also investigate the matter. We cannot consider Mr X’s complaint.
14. Mr X says the Council allowed him to submit an appeal and did not respond. The matters he raises about the Council’s handling of the appeal process could be included in his witness statement to the TEC. The ability to file a witness statement provides an alternative remedy for any complaint about fault by the Council. It was reasonable for Mr X include these matters as part of his witness statement.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has used his right to submit an out of time witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman