Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint that Mr X was denied his right to challenge a parking penalty charge notice as Mr X has asked the court to consider his case.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council did not send him a Notice to Owner (NtO) following it having issued him with a parking penalty charge notice (PCN). Mr X says that as such, he was denied the right to pay the PCN at the discounted rate or formally challenge it. Mr X also complains about the wording used in, and the tone of, letters sent to him by the Council about the PCN which Mr X says caused him stress and anxiety.

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. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
4. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X asked the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to consider his case that he was not able to appeal the PCN as he was not sent a NtO by the Council. As per paragraph three, due to this, we no longer have the legal remit to consider this matter.
8. Mr X would have had the right to pay the PCN at the discounted rate, for a period after the Council responded to the representations he made against it, had Mr X made those representations within 14 days of having received the PCN. Once a NtO is issued, this opportunity has passed. That Mr X did not receive the NtO did not therefore deny him the right to pay the PCN at the discounted rate.
9. I recognise that Mr X says he was caused stress by the wording and tone of letters sent to him by the Council. We will not investigate this as a separate matter as this does not represent a level of injustice that would warrant our involvement.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about not having received a NtO as he has asked the court to look at this and it is therefore no longer within our remit. Not receiving the NtO did not cause Mr X the injustice he claims as he would have had the right to pay the PCN at the discounted rate earlier on. Mr X is not caused a level of injustice from the wording of Council letters about the PCN to warrant our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman