Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s enforcement of a penalty charge notice for nonpayment of a tunnel charge as Mr X can ask the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre to consider his case.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) failed to respond to his formal challenge against a penalty charge notice (PCN) it issued to him for non-payment of a tunnel charge and then escalated the case to enforcement agents (bailiffs). Mr X says this has caused him mental and financial stress.

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. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Parliament has provided a mechanism by which Mr X, because of not having received a notice of rejection from TfL to his appeal, can challenge the enforcement of the PCN by asking the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to consider his case, by making a statutory declaration to it.
7. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take his case to court as this is the challenge procedure provided in law, and we are not another level of appeal in the process. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to ask the court at the TEC to consider his case.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman