Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as Mr X had the right to appeal against it to the independent tribunal. We will not investigate the Council’s administration of its permit system as it is unlikely we will find fault by it in this regard.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council permit system is unreasonable and makes lawful compliance impossible. Mr X says he was without a residents’ parking permit for around two weeks after he moved to his address and was issued with a parking penalty charge (PCN) during this time when he parked without a permit. Mr X says this has caused him stress, frustration and wasted time.

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. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Council’s parking permit policy.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X moved to a new address and applied for a residents’ parking permit. Mr X complains the Council would not issue the permit until the Driver Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) had updated the logbook for his car with his new address. Mr X was without a parking permit for around two weeks during which he was issued with a parking penalty charge notice (PCN) for parking without displaying a permit. Mr X is unhappy that the Council would not provide a temporary permit or cancel the PCN.
8. I recognise Mr X remains dissatisfied with what took place, but it is for the Council to determine its own parking permit policies, and it is entitled to require that the logbook record matches the address of the applicant before a permit will be issued, to prevent fraudulent applications. It is also for the Council to decide how to operate any visitor day parking passes. As such, we will not investigate and because Mr X’s complaint does not provide evidence of fault by the Council in how it applied its policy in his case.
9. Mr X had the right to appeal against the PCN to parking adjudicators at London Tribunals (LT), citing his mitigating circumstances. We are not another level of appeal in the statutory process, and we cannot make the decisions that LT can. It is reasonable therefore to expect Mr X to have appealed, and we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s application of its parking permit policy as it is unlikely we will find fault. Mr X had the right to appeal the PCN to LT, and we will not therefore investigate this aspect of the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman