Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council enforced a temporary parking suspension. This is because Mr X used his right to appeal the Penalty Charge Notice, and no personal injustice was caused to Mr X by the Council’s decision to take enforcement action against other motorists.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about high numbers of Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) being issued in one area. He says the Council did not explain if there was a systemic issue such as poor visibility of the signage during a temporary parking suspension period. He says it has taken considerable time and trouble to pursue his complaint and complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint. He wants the Council to review its administration of temporary parking suspensions and its complaint handling. Mr X wants the Council to reassure him that it has learned lessons from the problem.

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. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
4. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
5. 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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X received a PCN for a parking contravention. When a motorist receives a PCN there are two options. The motorist may pay the PCN to cancel it. Or the motorist may challenge the PCN by making formal representations, and if needed, putting in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for authorities outside London).
9. Mr X used his right to appeal the PCN. We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter.
10. Mr X discovered the Council issued a larger number of PCNs during a temporary parking suspension period and asked the Council to review whether the signage was sufficient.
11. It is the role of the tribunal, not the Ombudsman, to decide disputes about whether a PCN was correctly issued. This includes deciding whether signage in a particular location is sufficient.
12. Mr X says his complaint is not about the PCN he received. However, I do not consider Mr X has suffered personal injustice because of other motorists receiving PCNs and therefore we will not investigate.
13. Mr X also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he used his right to appeal the Parking Charge Notice, and no personal injustice was caused to Mr X by the Council’s decision to issue PCNs to other motorists.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman