LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the actions of a council officer in connection with his appeal against a penalty charge notice. This is because Mr X alleges the officer committed an offence and this is a matter for the police. The injustice Mr X claims stems from the issue of the penalty charge notice and his efforts to appeal against it and London Tribunals has considered this as part of his appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Tribunal and then the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about various matters in connection with Ms X’s appeal to London Tribunals about a penalty charge notice. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. We have no remit to investigate complaints in connection with matters considered by a tribunal. And it is not a good use of public money to look at ancillary matters around the administration of the appeal when the substantive issues lie outside jurisdiction.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice for driving in the ultra-low emission zone without paying the charge. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued in 2022. This is because the complaint is late and it would have been reasonable for Mr X to challenge the penalty charge notices by appealing to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice he disputes liability for. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the Traffic Enforcement Centre and London Tribunals are better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to cancel a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Ms X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to cancel several penalty charge notices for driving in a pedestrian zone. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about four penalty charge notices. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by the Council. This is because the Council has cancelled the penalty charge notices and it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal against them to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about several penalty charge notices issued by the Council for contraventions of its low-traffic neighbourhoods. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because Mr B put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of Mr X’s representations against a penalty charge notice as Mr X appealed the notice to London Tribunals. This matter is therefore no longer within our remit.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged moving traffic contravention. This is because Mr B put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice she received for an alleged moving traffic contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Ms B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that incorrect road signage led to Mrs X being issued with a penalty charge notice as Mrs X could have appealed about this to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking Penalty Charge Notice. It is reasonable for Ms X to use her statutory right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because Mr B appealed to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X receiving a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. Miss X could have used her legal right to appeal to London Tribunals and it was reasonable to expect her to do this.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a parking penalty charge notice. It was reasonable for Mr X to appeal the penalty to an adjudicator at the London Tribunals which is the proper authority to consider parking penalty challenges.