Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. It would have been reasonable to expect Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to have the Notice set back to an earlier stage.

The complaint

1. Mr X said the Council failed to follow the correct procedure for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and failed to properly consider his representations. Mr X said the Council continued to progress the PCN through the enforcement procedure.

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.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint because it would have been reasonable to expect Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman