Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s enforcement of a parking penalty charge notice as it is unlikely we will find fault by it.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he received no notice of the enforcement of a parking penalty charge notice (PCN) until the Council escalated the case to its enforcement agents (bailiffs). Mr X is unhappy bailiffs clamped his car when he says the matter was still in dispute.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X asked the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to set back the PCN to an earlier point in the enforcement process on the basis that Mr X had not received any notices about the PCN subsequent to his appeal against it and prior to bailiff involvement. The TEC refused Mr X’s request to consider his case.
6. As Mr X used his right to ask a court to consider his case, we no longer have any remit to investigate the Council’s enforcement action up to this point. After this, the Council was free to continue to enforce the unpaid PCN and so it is unlikely we will find fault that it did this. We will not therefore investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot look at the enforcement action prior to Mr X asking the TEC to consider his case and it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council in the action it took after the TEC’s involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman