Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about alleged failings with signage in a restricted parking zone. This is because penalties for parking contraventions carry a right of appeal to a statutory tribunal. Further, the Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint about a penalty charge notice because where complainant has appealed to a tribunal.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr F, is making a complaint about inadequate signage in the restricted parking area operated by the Council. He says it has previously been determined the signage is unlawful and yet the Council has not taken adequate steps to resolve the problem.
2. Mr F has also complained the Council did not contest his appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal against a penalty charge notice for a parking contravention.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. When someone has already exercised a right of appeal, we cannot investigate and have no discretion in this. The courts have decided this restriction applies even if the appeal could not provide a remedy for all the claimed injustice. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended).
5. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’.
6. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained; or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I have reviewed Mr F’s complaints to the Council and to us. I have also had regard to the responses of the Council and applicable legislation. Mr F commented on a draft before I made this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

8. The Council enforces parking restrictions and takes recovery action using procedures set out in the Traffic Management Act 2004 and associated Regulations. The Council and motorists must follow these procedures.
9. Anyone receiving a penalty charge notice from the Council for a parking contravention has a right of appeal to a statutory tribunal (such as London Tribunals). An appeal is free and relatively easy to use. It is also the way in which Parliament expects people to challenge a penalty charge notice. For these reasons, the restriction I describe in paragraph 3 generally applies.
10. One of the grounds of appeal is that the contravention did not occur. The London Tribunals website explains this ground applies ‘for example, the contravention did not happen as stated on the penalty charge notice or the prohibition was not properly signed.’

What happened

11. In February 2020, Mr F complained to the Council about the signage for the restricted parking zone. He said since 2014, it had failed to implement and maintain adequate traffic signs which adhere to the law, statutory guidelines and previous decisions by London Tribunals.
12. Mr F also complained about shortcomings in the Council’s appeals policy, such as not addressing the points he raised. In March 2020, the Council told Mr F it did not agree with his assessment of the signage and declined to consider his complaint further.
13. Mr F also received a penalty charge notice from the Council for a parking contravention. Mr F contested the penalty charge notice on the ground that the relevant restriction was not properly signed.

Assessment

14. I recognise that Mr F says he is not complaining about a penalty charge, but the legality of traffic signage and how this affects road users generally.
15. However, I consider he could only suffer injustice because of faulty signage if he received a penalty charge notice. We would not consider a complaint about this as we would expect him to appeal. An adjudicator at London Tribunals would then decide whether, in the particular circumstances, a contravention occurred.
16. We would not investigate a complaint from Mr F about a penalty charge notice issued to any other motorist. This is because the motorist could appeal to London Tribunals and Mr F would not suffer any injustice.
17. Separately, I note from Mr F’s comments on my draft decision that he is unhappy about how the Council handled his own penalty charge notice. However, Mr F appealed to London Tribunals. Although Mr F is unhappy the Council decided not to contest his appeal, the law is clear we cannot investigate in these circumstances. The restriction I described in paragraph 4 applies.

Back to top

Final decision

18. I cannot investigate this complaint. This is because Mr F has appealed to a tribunal and I have no power to investigate in these circumstances. Further, Mr F, and any other motorist, could appeal against any future penalty charge notice. Any penalty charge notice issued to another person could not cause Mr F personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman