Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking or traffic contravention. The complainant has used the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to show fair, consistent and transparent decision making regarding a penalty charge notice (PCN) it issued for a parking contravention. Mr X says the Council refused to exercise discretion to place enforcement action on hold. Mr X says the Council’s action caused him distress and uncertainty as well as loss of confidence in the Council’s processes. Mr X says the Council should refund the £495 enforcement payment he paid under duress and apologise for the distress it caused to him. He also says the Council should review how it exercises discretion to place enforcement action on hold.

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. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), part of the county court, considers applications to set the PCN process back where there has been procedural fault.
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information from the complainant and the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X’s wife, who is the registered keeper of the vehicle, received a PCN from the Council. Mr X who was the driver of the vehicle at the time said he forgot to purchase a parking ticket when he parked the vehicle. He purchased a parking ticket before the parking period ended but after the Council had issued the PCN.
8. The Council rejected informal representations made separately by Mr X and his wife. Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council. When the Council responded to the complaint at both stages of its complaint procedures it said it had considered their mitigating factors and explained why it would not cancel the PCN.
9. If a council rejects an ‘informal challenge’ the motorist can either pay the PCN, often at a discounted rate, or wait for the ‘notice to owner’ to make formal representations against it. If the Council rejects a motorist’s formal representations, the motorist can appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. Any unsuccessful appeal at the formal stages usually requires payment of the full PCN amount.
10. As set out at Paragraph 5, we do not usually investigate a complaint where someone has a right of appeal. This is because the law says that complaints about such matters fall outside our jurisdiction to investigate. The only exception to this is where we do not consider it would be reasonable to expect the person to appeal. Mr X said he and his wife had appealed to the TPT after the Council responded to his complaint.
11. Mr X’s wife also asked the TEC to consider the matter following his formal complaint to the Council. The TEC considers any procedural errors relating to the Council’s enforcement action. We cannot investigate this complaint because the matter has been considered by the TEC.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We cannot investigate this complaint because the complainant has already used the representations and appeals procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman