Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking or traffic contravention. It would be reasonable to expect the complainant to have used the statutory representations and appeals procedure. And of the other parts of X’s complaint we are satisfied with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. X says the Council has wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged traffic contravention. They also said they failed to properly investigate a complaint about the officer who issued the PCN, where they alleged the officer was responsible for poor driving and made threats toward him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
3. 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. If the person has already appealed we have no power to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England.
5. 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

6. I considered information from the complainant and the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. X complained to the Council saying it had wrongly issued a PCN for an offence. They also said the officer who issued the ticket had committed criminal offences.
8. I will not investigate the part of X’s complaint that relates to them being issued a PCN, where they believed they had not committed the parking offence. It is reasonable to have expected X to have used their appeal right to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal about this matter.
9. Nor will I investigate the other part of X’s complaint, that the Tribunal could not consider. The Council said it would consider X’s allegations under employment law and referred X, to the Police, to report criminal matters. It said it would co-operate with the Police about this. Those actions are appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because it would be reasonable for the complainant to use the representations and appeals procedure and of the other matters outside of that, the Council’s actions are appropriate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman