Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr Y’s Penalty Charge Notice on his hire car as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Council did not provide information on how to transfer his parking permit to a hire car, which led to him getting a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). He says the Council misled him to believe he had further appeal rights, which he was not able to exercise.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him financial loss by having to pay for the Penalty Charge Notice and administrative charges to the hire company.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y is a holder of a resident’s parking permit. He received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for a hire car he had parked while his own car was in for repair.
7. Mr Y did not transfer his permit to his temporary hire car. Mr Y says he could not find information on the Council’s website on transferring the permit to a hire car.
8. The Council said in its response that Mr Y did not tell it about the temporary change of car.
9. The responsibility of parking in line with rules lies with the driver. So, it was Mr Y’s responsibility to tell the Council about his temporary car so they could update his permit.
10. Guidance is available on the Council’s website on transferring permits to temporary cars. Mr Y could have accessed this, or he could have contacted the Council by telephone to tell them. As the Council made this guidance available, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
11. Mr Y also complained the Council misled him that he had further appeal rights. Mr Y made an informal representation against the PCN, which the Council rejected.
12. In its response, the Council said that Mr Y could formally appeal the PCN once he receives a Notice to Owner.
13. Councils must send correspondence for PCNs to the vehicle owner. In this case, this was the hire company, so the Council sent the details of formal appeal to them, rather than to Mr Y.
14. Under the hire company’s policy, when they received the Penalty Charge Notice they paid it and then charged it to Mr Y’s account with an administration fee. This was part of the hire contract Mr Y had signed and agreed to.
15. The Council sent the Notice to Owner to the owner, which was the hire company. The hire company did not tell the Council that Mr Y had hired the car and instead paid the PCN. As the Council sent the correspondence to the correct owner, we will not investigate as there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman