London Borough of Haringey (26 010 213)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 19 Jul 2026

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking or traffic contravention. It would be reasonable to expect the complainant to use the statutory representations and appeals procedure.

The complaint

  1. X says the Council has wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), after the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) cancelled the recovery order and charge certificate relating to that PCN. X believes they have an exemption to the initial offence, and the Council should now cancel the PCN.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
  2. 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. If the person has already appealed we have no power to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
  3. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information from the complainant and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. X said they filed a late witness statement with the TEC, after they belatedly became aware the Council was pursuing them for an unpaid PCN. In May 2026, the TEC cancelled the costs related to the earlier recovery action and the charge certificate for the PCN. However, it did not cancel the PCN.
  2. X complained to us, because in February 2026, they had written to the Council about their exemption against the offence listed on their PCN. X did this before the TEC considered their request.
  3. X now wants the Council to cancel the PCN, because it had re-issued it, after the TEC made its decision. X’s late witness statement with the TEC, reverted their initial PCN, back to an earlier stage in the representations and appeal process.
  4. Therefore, I will not investigate this complaint, because X can make their representations to the Council about why they did not commit this offence. And if the Council decides not to accept their representations, X can appeal to the Tribunal. Only the Tribunal can cancel a PCN, we cannot do so. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect X to use their appeal right.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate this complaint because it would be reasonable for the complainant to use the representations and appeals procedure.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings