The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Mr Y complained the Council sent correspondence about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to an incorrect address and later letters were not sent by email as requested after Mr Y moved abroad.
Mr Y says this led to the penalty increasing from £30 to over £400.Mr Y says he has spent time and effort in dealing with the issue and he is worried about the fine increasing further.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended) 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council issued a PCN to Mr Y after he drove in a bus lane in August 2021. The correspondence for this was sent to an address, provided to the Council by the DVLA, which Mr Y no longer lived at. Mr Y made representations to the Council asking it to cancel the PCN. The Council rejected the representations.
Mr Y’s wife then contacted the Council by email in October, asking it to send emails to her as she and Mr Y had moved abroad. The Council says it responded to say it could not do this, as it needed to sent documents by post, and it did not have authority from Mr Y to do this.
The PCN process then progressed, with the Council registering a Charge Certificate with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court. The TEC then granted an Order for Recovery of the penalty owed. Enforcement Agents then contacted Mr Y at his new address after he returned to the country in May 2022.
Mr Y complained to the Council, who denied fault and made him aware of his right to approach the TEC and referred him to us.
Analysis Mr Y has a right to submit a late statutory declaration to the TEC, asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. In this he can explain why he did not receive the Council’s correspondence and why he was unaware the amount was increasing.
If the TEC accepts Mr Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. It also has the power to remove any cost of enforcement previously incurred. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
This is free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service.
Consequently, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal and we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right of appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman