Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about penalty charge notices issued to Mr X. This is because Transport for London has offered a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he has received penalty charge notices (PCNs) for a vehicle which is not his. Mr X is unhappy with Transport for London’s (TfL) response to the evidence he has provided.
2. Mr X wants compensation for the distress, inconvenience and administrative burden caused by having to challenge the PCN’s.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X received several PCNs before TfL’s first complaint response in October 2025. TfL cancelled these PCN’s following Mr X’s representations that the vehicle was not his and advised it would put measures in place to carry out additional checks before issuing any further PCNs for the vehicle.
7. Mr X complained to us in January 2026 because he received further PCN’s and was worried he would receive more. In response to our enquiries TfL explained the PCN’s were issued in error and it has therefore cancelled them.
8. TfL believes the issue is due to camera readings of particular letters on the registration plate rather than vehicle cloning.
9. It recognises it did not handle the matter correctly and to its credit it has agreed to apologise to Mr X and pay him £150 for the stress, anxiety and inconvenience caused. It should complete the agreed remedy within 4 weeks of this decision statement. TfL’s offer provides a suitable remedy for Mr X and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for him.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because TfL have proposed a suitable remedy. Further investigation is therefore unlikely to achieve anything more for Mr X.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman