LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge notices because it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to approach the ICO, the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals about the complaints raised.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. It would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal the matter to London Tribunals. In any event, the Authority identified its error before referring the matter to court, and cancelled the penalty. There is insufficient evidence of injustice caused to Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about two Penalty Charge Notices he received for alleged moving traffic contraventions. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to put in representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council issuing a moving traffic penalty. It was reasonable for Mr X to challenge the penalty notice by appealing to the London Tribunals which are an independent body dealing with traffic penalty appeals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice. This is because Ms X has used her right of appeal against the penalty charge notice to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. Mr X has used his right of appeal and we have no power to change the decision made by London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it was reasonable for Mr B to challenge the Notice by making representations to the Council, and if needed, putting in an appeal to London Tribunals.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Miss B to put in formal representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice as it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then the London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority issuing several Penalty Charge Notices to the complainant. They have already submitted a Statutory Declaration out of time to the Traffic Enforcement Centre, and it is then reasonable for them to use their right to appeal to London Tribunals. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the matter we could investigate.

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

Summary: Miss B complained the Council wrongly issued a penalty charge notice for an alleged parking offence. We have ended our investigation as Miss B had a right of appeal to the London Tribunals and it was reasonable for her to use this appeal right.

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

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by Transport for London because Mr X has appealed against them to London Tribunals. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that Transport for London lost his £25 payment towards the penalty charge notices because the amount is not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information provided by the Tribunal. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

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

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to appeal to the London Tribunals.

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

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of his appeal against a penalty charge notice. We cannot lawfully investigate where a person has used his right of appeal. This includes the conduct of the appeal, the adjudicators consideration of the evidence and the decision rejecting the appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a penalty charge notice for a parking contravention which he disputes. This is because the validity of the penalty charge notice is a matter for London Tribunals and it would be reasonable for Mr X to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre at Northampton County Court to reinstate his right of appeal.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by the Council. This is because it would have been reasonable for him to appeal to London Tribunals. If Mr X believes the Council has failed to follow the proper process in escalating the penalty charge notice he may apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to take the process back to an earlier stage.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because Mr Y can reasonably be expected to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.