Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. It would be reasonable to expect Mr X to have used the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council should have applied discretion about the two Penalty Charge Notice’s (PCNs) he received for travelling along the same road. Mr X complains the Council did not respond to his appeal and escalated his case to bailiff enforcement too quickly. Mr X says this caused him financial distress, stress and frustration while dealing with the situation. Mr X also complains about poor complaint handling.

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 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)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information from Mr X and the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment  

6. The Council issued Mr X with two PCNs while he was travelling along the same road. Mr X sent an appeal by email to the Council. He was told via an automatic acknowledgement, that he would need to make the appeal through the online portal. No further representations were made to the Council.
7. When a council issues a PCN the motorist has 28 days to pay the penalty charge or appeal; appeals at this stage are known as informal challenges. If the Council decides not to accept an informal challenge, the motorist can make formal representations against the PCN. If the council rejects the motorist’s formal representations the motorist may appeal to London Tribunals.
8. If the motorist does not pay or make formal representations the council will issue a charge certificate, increasing the amount payable by 50%. It may then apply to the TEC to register the debt, before instructing enforcement agents bailiffs to recover it.
9. Had Mr X wished to challenge the PCN it would have been reasonable for him to appeal under the statutory process set out above. The Council’s automatic acknowledgement of his email provided information on Mr X could appeal. Mr X made a complaint to the Council, but the complaints process does not amount to a further opportunity to challenge a PCN. We will therefore not investigate this complaint because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to make formal representations and then appeal to the Tribunal.
10. We will also not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint as it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint handling when we are not looking at the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. It would be reasonable to expect Mr X to have used the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman