Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to go to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complains the Council has wrongly issued and is trying to enforcement a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) against her company.
2. Mrs Y says the issue has caused an unfair financial burden on the company, caused distress and worry and feels the Council has acted unfairly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mrs Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs Y’s company hires vehicles to its self-employed contractors under rental agreements. Mrs Y says one of the contractors incurred a PCN, but this was received by the company. She says she made representations to the Council. These were not accepted as the Council said the contractor was an employee of the company and therefore the company, rather than the individual would be responsible for the PCN. Mrs Y disagrees with this view.
7. Mrs Y is seeking the reissuing of the PCN, which would also end any enforcement against the company, to the individual contractor who incurred the PCN.
8. Mrs Y can submit a late statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. This will stop enforcement action against the company if it is accepted. If the TEC accepts Mrs Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mrs Y’s right of appeal against it to the London Tribunals. At the London Tribunals she can then put forward an appeal, on the basis that the vehicle was hired from the company by the contractor and therefore the company is not responsible for the PCN.
9. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mrs Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to go to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman