Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about London Tribunals’ handling of Mr X’s appeal against a penalty charge notice. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains London Tribunals cut him off while he was waiting to participate in a penalty charge notice (PCN) appeal hearing by phone. The Adjudicator refused his appeal and rejected his application for a review of the decision.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We can investigate complaints about the administrative actions of Adjudicators at London Tribunals but the Adjudicators themselves act in a quasi-judicial way; as a result we cannot consider any complaint about an Adjudicator’s decision on an individual appeal.
5. Mr X’s complaint concerns an administrative issue and as such the complaint is within our jurisdiction. However, we cannot say the issue complained about affected the Adjudicator’s decision to refuse his appeal and we have no power to overturn the appeal decision. We could not therefore achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X by investigating this matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman