Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council providing contradicting information about renewing parking permits which led to Ms X receiving a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for her to have used her right of appeal. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the remaining part of the complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has been providing contradicting information about renewing parking permits. She said she has issues with her memory, and the Council have failed to treat her fairly. She said because of this, she received a penalty charge notice (PCN) and has been caused significant distress.
2. Ms X also complains about delays in the Council’s complaints process. Ms X wants the Council to ensure disabled people are treated equally, ensure renewal reminders are sent and make changes to its system.

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. The law says 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
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 Ms X with a PCN after her parking permit expired. Ms X said the Council’s website was often inaccessible and did not provide reminders about charges or permit renewal. She said this disadvantaged disabled people who faced barriers using online services.
10. 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.
11. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. The statutory appeals process for a PCN is free and relatively informal. I recognise there was a risk Ms X may have had to pay the full charge if her appeal was unsuccessful. However, the appeals process is set out in law and was the appropriate way to challenge the PCN. I have seen nothing to suggest it was not reasonable for Ms X to use that process and she did pay the fine in April 2026. We also will not consider matters about the Council’s system relating to issuing reminders as this would have been reasonable to raise via tribunal and is not separable.
12. After Ms X paid the fine, she no longer had a statutory right of appeal. The Council nevertheless considered her representations and explained why it would not cancel the PCN. I have seen insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
13. While Ms X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about.  We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because it would have been reasonable for her to have used her right of appeal. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the remaining part of the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman