Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s escalation of penalty charge notices. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to take the process back to an earlier stage.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains he has wrongly received penalty charge notices (PCNs) due to cloning of his vehicle registration. Mr X has provided evidence of this to the Council, but it has taken enforcement action.
2. Mr X complains of financial and personal difficulty caused and the inconvenience of time taken to challenge the penalties. This has affected his work and academic study. Mr X wants the Council to acknowledge his evidence and end any outstanding liability. He wants the Council to refund all payments made and pay further compensation.

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 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X received five PCN’s between May 2024 and April 2025. In May 2025, Mr X wrote to the Council advising he had just received the letters as he had been living elsewhere during university studies and asked for a payment arrangement to settle the charges.
8. In July 2025, Mr X disputed that he was the driver of the vehicle and reported his registration as cloned to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) and the Police.
9. As the Council did not receive any representations, it proceeded through the statutory process. It advised Mr X, in July 2025, of the grounds on which he could file a witness statement with the TEC. Therefore Paragraph 4 of this decision statement applies.
10. Mr X settled the outstanding debt following enforcement agents taking control of his vehicle. Mr X has asked the Council to refund these costs.
11. If the TEC accepts an application, it may order the Council to revert the process back to an earlier stage, reinstating Mr X’s right of appeal and removing the basis for increased charges. If the TEC refuses Mr X’s application, he may apply for a review of its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s escalation of penalty charge notices. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to take the process back to an earlier stage.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman