Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to regain their appeal rights, and then to appeal to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. In short, Mr X says that he was unaware that a penalty charge notice (PCN) had been issued against him. He says he did not receive any correspondence until bailiffs visited.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court or use 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 go to court or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and (c), as amended)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), part of the county court, considers applications to set the PCN process back where there has been procedural fault.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

My Assessment

6. The Council says a parking session was purchased after the penalty charge notice was issued. It says all its correspondence was sent to the registered address obtained from the DVLA.
7. Parking Penalties are subject to a statutory appeal process. The law provides for motorists who did not receive statutory notices to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to file a witness statement or statutory declaration out of time.
8. We will not investigate. This is because the issues raised - if the PCN was correctly issued and if the enforcement action should have progressed - fall within the statutory process. The Ombudsman expects complainants to pursue that remedy, and I see no good reasons why Mr X should not be expected to do this.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to regain their appeal rights and then appeal if the TEC agrees.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman