Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council issuing Mr X with three penalty charge notices. This is because the law prevents us from investigating the penalty charge notices after his appeal to the Tribunal, and there is not enough evidence of fault in the Councils consideration of mitigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s issue of three penalty charge notices (PCNs). He said he displayed a blue badge and the Council wrongly relied on its valid-from date, which was later than the date it was issued. He appealed to the Tribunal, but his appeals were unsuccessful.
2. Mr X said this caused him significant distress. He wants the Ombudsman to investigate the Council’s decision, cancel the PCNs and review the Council’s processes.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions 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 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The Council issued Mr X with a PCN for parking in a disabled bay without clearly displaying a valid blue badge. Mr X made representations and appealed to the Tribunal. The appeal was refused because the blue badge displayed was not yet valid and Mr X should have used his previous badge. The Tribunal also said it could not consider mitigating circumstances, as that was a matter for the Council.
10. As Mr X appealed to the Tribunal, we cannot investigate the PCN itself. We can only consider whether there was fault in the Council’s consideration of any mitigating circumstances.
11. In his subsequent representations to the Council, Mr X said the blue badge was visible and the valid-from date was not relevant in law. The Council said it was not required to accept mitigation and decided not to cancel the PCN. There is not enough evidence of fault in that decision. In any event, Mr X’s representations to the Council were not separable from the issues considered by the Tribunal.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the law prevents us from investigating the PCN after his appeal to the Tribunal, and there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s consideration of mitigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman