Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of Penalty Charge Notices. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to regain her appeal rights, and then to appeal to a tribunal if the Traffic Enforcement Centre agrees.

The complaint

1. Ms X says the Council failed to follow the correct procedure for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and obstructed her right to appeal against it. Ms X complains the Council has delayed processing the PCNs and registering the cases with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) and provided her with incorrect information. Ms X says her complaint is not about the decision to issue the PCNs. Instead, her concerns are about the way the PCNs were handled by the Council.

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 could take the matter to court or use 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 go to court or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and (c), as amended)
4. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), part of the county court, considers applications to set the PCN process back where there has been procedural fault.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint because Ms X can apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to regain her appeal rights, and may then appeal if the Traffic Enforcement Centre agrees. I understand Ms X says her complaint is about how the PCNs were processed. But the resulting injustice is that she needs to pay the PCNs and this can be appealed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman