Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice and the Council’s handling of parking restriction signage at events hosted by a third party. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal the matter to London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mr X says he received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for a parking violation in August 2024. He says he was not aware there were any parking restrictions as the Council had not displayed signage indicating any event held by the third party would have prohibited parking in that area. Mr X says the Council does not display a schedule of events in the area or related parking restrictions, which causes confusion for residents. He wants the Council to apologise. He also wants it to display clear signage when future events take place to avoid further confusion.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. The law says 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. A third party holds events and displays the schedule for them on its website. The Council has told Mr X it is not responsible for the events, nor does it hold full details of the schedule. The Council’s role is to enforce parking restrictions when the events take place, not to publicise them. The Council’s website advises residents to check any parking restrictions at the relevant locations prior to travel, as the company may not always display the full schedule of events on its website. It says it is a driver’s responsibility to be aware of event dates, and ensure they are aware of any parking restrictions.
8. Mr X said no signs were displayed indicating any parking restrictions, and he was not aware any event was scheduled on the date he was issued the PCN. The Council has invited Mr X to make representations to challenge the PCN. There is a process set out in law for a motorist to formally challenge a PCN. This involves the motorist making formal representations to the local authority, and if needed, appealing to London Tribunals. We generally expect this process to be used. The tribunal is independent and has the power to cancel a PCN.
9. As parking restrictions are governed by traffic regulation orders and signage, what is or is not shown on websites is not material. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to follow the PCN appeal process if he considers the Council’s signage was defective.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it would be reasonable for Mr X to use the representations and appeals procedure for the PCN.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman