Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to take enforcement action against Mrs X. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council took enforcement action after she received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). She said it continued enforcement action whilst she had an outstanding complaint. She said it failed to consider evidence she submitted and did not respond to her complaint in accordance with its complaint procedure.
2. She said enforcement action made her unable to carry out her caring responsibilities which caused stress and anxiety. She wants an apology and compensation for the distress caused.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
6. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Mrs X complained about enforcement action taken by the Council after she received a PCN. The Council said it issued three PCN’s due to non-display of a Blue Badge.
10. Mrs X challenged the PCN’s and the Council issued a refusal letter and asked for further information. Mrs X did not provide the information within the timescale set by the Council, and it progressed to a Notice to Owner (NTO). Mrs X provided evidence in response to the NTO and one of the PCN’s was cancelled as the Council deemed it a first offence.
11. The Council issued a formal Notice of Rejection for one of the two outstanding PCN’s. The Council did not log the representations against the remaining PCN, and a Notice of Rejection was not issued. In its complaint response the Council said this was a procedural error and apologised to Mrs X.
12. Mrs X said she did not respond fully to the request for information within the timescales because she was abroad. She provided evidence of her being abroad after enforcement action had progressed and her vehicle was clamped.
13. We will not investigate this complaint. In response to Mrs X’s complaint the Council explained why it registered the debt and progressed enforcement action. In response to receiving evidence from Mrs X the Council considered her personal circumstances and cancelled the two outstanding PCN’s. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
14. In addition, when the Council rejected Mrs X’s representations and she received the NTO she could have appealed to the Tribunal, and it would be reasonable to expect her to have done so.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman