Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Dr Y complained the Council’s process for Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) appeals is unfair. This is because he says it forces the recipient to choose between a discounted rate for 14-days and the ability to appeal within 28 days at the full rate. He also complained that the Council wrongly said it could not pause the clock on the 14-day period until after the Council considered his representations.
2. Mr Y says the issue placed him at a disadvantage and he found the system confusing and distressing.

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 Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Councils must follow a set procedure for moving traffic penalties and their enforcement.
6. The Council offered a 14-day period where the Council discounted the penalty to £60. If not paid within the 14-day period, the penalty returned to its full amount of £120. This includes where a motorist has made representations against the PCN. The Council has up to 56 days to consider representations.
7. The Road User Charging Schemes (Penalty Charges, Adjudication and Enforcement) (England) Regulations 2013 Regulation 8 places a duty on the Council to consider representations received within 28 days, even if a motorist has paid a penalty.
8. While Mr Y may feel the reduced period is unfair, this process is set out in the procedure councils must follow. Consequently, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating the Council ending this period after 14 days. Mr Y also had the choice to pay the penalty in full and still have any formal representations considered. His right to make representations, which had the potential to lead to cancelling the PCN remained the same. Thus, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.
9. Mr Y also complained the Council said it did not have discretion to pause the clock on the discounted period. The Council said it was referring to the payment clock, rather than to the 14-day period in its complaint response.
10. The correspondence shows, Mr Y wanted the clock for the 14-day period to stop while the Council considered his representations. He did not provide justification for the Council to consider discretion, other than wanting a discount.
11. The law does not require councils to reinstate the discounted amount if it rejects representations. The payment within 14-days is a discount of the full amount. It is the motorist’s choice whether to pay or make representations at the risk of the full amount being owed. As the Council’s refusal to reinstate the 14-day period is in line with the set procedure and the Council clarified this, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman