Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. The Council has apologised, withdrawn them and instigated a service improvement. We are unlikely to achieve more.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council should not have issued three Penalty Charge Notices (PCN). She says she had a parking permit for the spaces and showed this to the officer issuing the tickets.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X the Council’s replies to her.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council issued the PCNs in October 2025, January and February 2026. It has withdrawn the PCNs. It says the issuing officer’s handheld device had a fault. It says it advised officers of this to avoid a repeat. It apologised to Mrs X.
6. The Council’s internal appeals process has provided an apology, withdrawal of the PCNs and made services improvements. We are unlikely to achieve more.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to achieve more than the Council’s complaint process has.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman