Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s issue and handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because the validity of the penalty charge notice is a matter for the appeals process and it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the court to reinstate his right of appeal.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly issued him a penalty charge notice (PCN) for driving in its clean air zone without paying the charge. He says his vehicle is compliant with the relevant emissions standards and he did not therefore need to pay. He wishes to challenge the PCN but says he did not receive either the original or reissued PCN allowing him to do so.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court but cannot investigate if they have already been to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from local authorities to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge local authorities’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs.
5. 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)
6. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. Because Mr X did not receive the original PCN from the Council he applied to the TEC to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case and take the process back to the beginning. The TEC accepted his application and the Council reissued the PCN, but Mr X says he did not receive the reissued PCN either.
10. We cannot investigate any complaint about the Council’s handling and escalation of the original PCN because Mr X has taken the matter to the TEC.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about not receiving the reissued PCN because it would be reasonable for him to follow the process again.
12. The Council has provided copies of the PCNs issued to Mr X and both show Mr X’s current address. It is therefore unlikely we could say it is at fault for Mr X not receiving the PCNs and the TEC is therefore the most appropriate body to consider the matter and the most likely to provide him with a remedy for the issue.
13. If the TEC accepts Mr X’s application, and once the Council has reissued the PCN again, it would be reasonable for Mr X to make representations against the PCN and, if the Council refuses them, appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. The restriction at Paragraph 5 will then apply.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to take the matter to the TEC.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman