Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about parking Penalty Charge Notices issued by the Council. It would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly consider his mitigating circumstances and financial position when pursuing him for payment of five parking Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) it issued to him for parking in a space he was not permitted to park in. Mr X complains the Council process for enforcing payment is unfair and unjust.

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 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)
4. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from councils to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge councils’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs. The London Tribunals can then consider parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

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. The Council issued Mr X five PCNs for parking his vehicle in a space for a period and not moving it. Mr X disputes the validity of the PCNs as they were all issued when the car was in the same spot. Mr X also says he is currently unemployed and the subject of a Debt Management Plan and so is unable to pay the charges unless in increments. The Council rejected Mr X’s challenges.
8. Mr X argues the Council did not properly consider his mitigating circumstances or his financial situation when pursuing payment of the PCNs. An adjudicator at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal can consider whether a council has properly considered arguments about mitigating or compelling circumstances. So, the restriction in paragraph three applies to this complaint. As the law expressly provides this route for deciding such matters, we normally expect people to use it. Appealing is usually free and relatively simple so would not have added to the financial pressure Mr X says he is experiencing. Overall, it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal when he had the right.

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman