Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it would be reasonable to expect
Miss X to use the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to her vehicle and did not properly consider her representations about the street signage being illegible.
2. Miss X said this caused her financial difficulties and she wanted the Council to refund her the £80 charge.

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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. The Council issued Miss X’s vehicle with a PCN. Miss X challenged the PCN with the Council, stating the street signage was unreadable due to damage. She asked it to cancel the PCN.
9. The Council rejected Miss X’s challenge and informed her of her right to make formal representations if she wished to take the matter further. Had the Council then rejected her representations; she would then have had the right to appeal to London Tribunals. It would have been reasonable to expect Miss X to have followed this procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it would be reasonable to expect her to use the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman