Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s correspondence about a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council has agreed to take the process back to the initial stage and this provides a suitable remedy for Mr X and it is unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly consider or respond to his correspondence about a penalty charge notice (PCN). He says he did not receive the Council’s statutory notices and the Council failed to provide information about the PCN to allow him to challenge its escalation. He is also not satisfied with the Council’s handling of his complaint.
2. Mr X says the issue has caused him stress and anxiety and he has gone to time and trouble to deal with the issue.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council issued Mr X a PCN in July 2025. He did not pay or make representations against it so the Council escalated it to the next stage of the process and ultimately registered the unpaid PCN as a debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court in September 2025. It then passed the case to enforcement agents (bailiffs) to recover payment from Mr X in November 2025.
7. Mr X did not receive the Council’s correspondence about the PCN and only found out about it when the bailiffs traced him to a different address. He applied to the TEC to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case but the TEC refused to consider his application. It listed two reasons for this; firstly, it said the PCN had not been registered and secondly, it was unclear who had witnessed his signature.
8. Mr X contacted the Council for further information but says it took too long to respond. He says the TEC now accepts the PCN was registered but the confusion prevented him from challenging it sooner.
9. It is a legal requirement for motorists to update the address shown in their vehicle’s registration document when they move home. If they do not, any PCNs and statutory notices are likely to go to their old address. This is what happened in Mr X’s case.
10. While the Council’s bailiffs traced Mr X to his new address, the Council says it was unaware Mr X had moved home. It cannot explain why the TEC told him the PCN had not been registered but the Council had no control over the TEC’s responses and we cannot therefore say it must provide any remedy for the issue.
11. Now that the TEC accepts the case has been registered Mr X could make a new application and we would generally consider it reasonable for a motorist to use this process in these circumstances. However, the Council has agreed to take action to resolve the issue without him needing to do so. It has cancelled its enforcement action and agreed to re-issue the PCN and this provides the best possible outcome he could have achieved with the TEC. The Council’s actions put Mr X back in the position he would have been had he received the original PCN without needing to take any further action and Mr X may now decide whether to challenge the PCN or pay it at the original discounted rate.
12. I am satisfied the Council’s actions provide a suitable remedy for Mr X and it is therefore unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for him.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman