Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council has not put in place clear signage to alert motorists to a traffic restriction. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to challenge the Penalty Charge Notice he received by putting in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The Tribunal is in the best position to decide this matter.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Council has not put in place clear signage to warn motorists of a new bus gate. Mr B says he and many other motorists have been issued with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for inadvertently committing a contravention in this location. Mr B says the road layout changes are not clear and he considers the Council is using this bus gate to generate income. Mr B would like the Council to put in place clear signage and refund all affected drivers.

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 Act 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 Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. A motorist may pay a PCN to cancel it. Or, the motorist may follow the statutory representations and appeals process to challenge a PCN. This involves the motorist making formal representations to the local authority.
8. If the local authority rejects these representations, the motorist may put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for authorities outside London).
9. The Tribunal is independent and has the power to cancel a PCN. The process is free to use and relatively straightforward. We generally expect motorists to use this process if they consider a PCN was wrongly issued.
10. Rather than pay this PCN, Mr B could have put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The Tribunal would have considered whether this PCN was correctly issued including whether the Council has put up sufficient signage to alert motorists to this traffic restriction.
11. I find it was reasonable for Mr B to do this. The Tribunal was in the best position to decide the issue complained about.
12. So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it was reasonable for him to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman