Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the enforcement of multiple Parking Charge Notices. It would be reasonable to expect Miss X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to regain her appeal rights and then to appeal to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s enforcement action in relation to Penalty Charge Notices (PCN) she received. Miss X said the debt has significantly increased and the matter has caused her distress. She wants the Council to offer her an affordable payment plan.

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 could take the matter to court or use 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 go to court or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and (c), as amended)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), part of the county court, considers applications to set the PCN process back where there has been procedural fault.
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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information from Miss X, the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X said the Council issued her approximately 40 PCNs for parking her car on a street. Miss X said she had a parking permit however the Council oversold parking permits in the area and so she was not always able to park in her designated space.
8. Miss X said she paid some of the PCNs but a lot remained unpaid. Due to this, the Council passed the debt to an Enforcement Agency and subsequently, her debt increased significantly.
9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Miss X to apply to The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) and ask it to consider setting back the unpaid PCNs to their initial stages. Miss X could then appeal the PCNs following the decision.
10. Furthermore, it is unlikely we would find fault in relation to the parking permit. This is because a parking permit does not automatically protect someone from receiving a PCN as parking permits do have conditions.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it would be reasonable to expect Miss X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to regain her appeal rights. Miss X may then appeal if the Traffic Enforcement Centre agrees.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman