Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking or traffic contravention because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the Council’s handling of a Parking Charge Notice and the Council’s decision to pass the debt to an enforcement agent.
2. He also complains about complaint handling and says the Council has breached the Equality Act.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
4. 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)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England.
6. 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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
7. The Information Commissioner’s Office oversees data protection legislation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by Mr Y and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. The Council issued a Parking Charge Notice (PCN) to Mr Y in August 2024. Mr Y says he was not made aware of the PCN until November 2025, when he was contacted by an enforcement agency. The Council had a right to pass the unpaid debt to an enforcement agency to recover this.
11. Mr Y says he is not liable for the PCN and has challenged this with the Council. The Council has explained the statutory process to Mr Y. We will not investigate this complaint because Mr Y can appeal the PCN to the London Tribunals and it is reasonable to expect him to do this.
12. Mr Y raises concerns about data breaches, questioning how his personal data was obtained by enforcement agents. He can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office if he is concerned about how the Council handled his data as it is best placed to deal with this part of his complaint.
13. Mr Y also says the Council has breached the Equality Act. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. I understand Mr Y says he was sent a payment demand after his vulnerability was acknowledged and he was told enforcement action was on hold. However, Mr Y had can use the appeal procedure if he disagrees with the decision to issue the PCN and pursue him for payment.
14. Mr Y has 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

15. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to use the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman