Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s signage for a bus gate. This is because the impact of the issue on Miss X relates to the issue of a penalty charge notice, and her challenge to the notice, and Miss X has used her right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s handling of the case after Miss X’s appeal.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council failed to properly manage, review or oversee its signage at a bus gate which has resulted in tens of thousands of penalty charge notices (PCNs). The Council issued Ms X a PCN for driving through the bus gate and says the issue has caused her stress, time and financial harm. She is unhappy the Council continued to escalate the PCN while she was in the process of complaining about it and says she feels unfairly treated.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. 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. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right but cannot investigate if they have already used it.. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Because Miss X has appealed against the PCN the exclusion set out at Paragraph 4 applies. We cannot therefore investigate any complaint about the issue of the PCN or the Council’s handling of Miss X’s challenges to it.
9. Miss X has continued to dispute the PCN via the complaints process after receiving the Adjudicator’s decision but this process is not designed to deal with disputes against PCNs, especially where the PCN has already been the subject of an appeal. There is also no requirement for the Council to put the case on hold while it deals with a complaint; the Adjudicator’s decision was clear the PCN must be paid within 28 days and because Miss X did not do this, the Council was entitled to escalate it in accordance with the statutory process. There was no suggestion the Council told Miss X it would put the case on hold, so I do not find any evidence of fault by the Council on this point.
10. While I appreciate Miss X’s wider concerns about the Council’s signage, this point is addressed in the Adjudicator’s decision and they have found the signage to be adequate. Miss X suggests the Council is wrong to treat the decision as an independent review of the signage but there is no need for the Council to conduct any further reviews when the independent appeal body for PCNs is satisfied the signage is adequate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the substantive issue falls outside our jurisdiction and there is no evidence of fault by the Council in its handling of the case following Miss X’s appeal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman