Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to wait for the Council to register the unpaid penalty charge notice as a debt with the court and then apply to challenge the Council’s escalation of the case by making a witness statement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to consider or respond to representations made on his behalf against a penalty charge notice (PCN). His representative Mr Y says the Council wrongly relied on an expired contact restriction from 2025 and failed to take account of Mr X’s protected characteristics under the Equality Act 2010. He says this prevented Mr X from challenging the PCN.

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. 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 Y and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y has a history of disputes with the Council which led to it restricting his further communication in 2025. He says this restriction was due to lapse before the end of 2025.
8. In 2026 the Council issued Mr X a PCN. Mr X did not pay the PCN or challenge it so it escalated the case to the next stage in the process and sent Mr X a ‘notice to owner’. Mr Y responded by email stating Mr X did not intend to contravene any parking restrictions, is elderly and could not afford to pay the penalty charge. He did not receive a response to his email and believes the Council refused to respond due to the contact restriction, despite it having lapsed. He also suggests the Council may have discriminated against Mr X on the grounds he could not make his own representations against the PCN due to his age and disability.
9. We cannot decide if the Council discriminated against Mr X; only the courts can decide this issue. The TEC, as part of Northampton County Court, can also consider Mr Y’s claim that he made representations against the PCN on Mr X’s behalf but did not receive a response. He may do this by making a witness statement once the Council has registered the case with the TEC. The Council confirms it may do this from 30 August 2026.
10. The TEC has powers we do not and it may order the Council to take the process back to an earlier stage. This would reinstate Mr X’s right of appeal against the PCN, reduce the amount of the penalty charge and remove the basis for any further charges. If the TEC refuses Mr X’s application he may apply for a review of its decision.
11. The process is free and relatively straightforward to follow and if Mr X has any issues completing the form he may ask for help from the TEC, Mr Y or an organisation such as Citizen’s Advice.
12. In the circumstances I consider the TEC is better placed to deal with the issue raised in this case and that it would be reasonable for Mr X/Mr Y to use the process

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr X to wait for the Council to register the case at the TEC and then make a witness statement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman