Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. The claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement, and in any case, there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). Mr X complained the enforcement agent (EA) acting on behalf of the Council clamped his Motability car.
2. Mr X said this caused significant distress and a negative impact to his mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. EA’s visited Mr X’s property to enforce a Penalty Charge notice.
7. Mr X complained the EA unlawfully clamped his Motability car, to satisfy the debt.
8. The EA said when it carried out DVLA searches on the car, this did not return a disability marker. Once it confirmed the cars Motability status, it removed the clamp. The clamp was on the car for no more than two days.
9. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures.
10. While I acknowledge Mr X’s distress because of a clamp being placed on his Motability car, I do not consider the injustice suffered because of the car being clamped for two days, meets the threshold for our involvement.
11. In any case, in the complaint responses, the EA identified an improvement to its service. It asked its provider to return the required information on future DVLA searches to prevent recurrence of this incident. The Council also apologised for any distress caused in its response to Mr X.
12. An Ombudsman investigation would not achieve significantly more than this and so I consider there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement.
13. For these reasons, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman