The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his representations against six penalty charge notices. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council failed to properly consider his representations against six penalty charge notices (PCNs) for moving traffic contraventions at two separate locations. He says the Council failed to consider his mitigating circumstances or to exercise its discretion not to pursue the PCNs.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. We may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal but cannot investigate if the person has already appealed. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended) London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X disputes the PCNs issued by the Council. He made representations against them to the Council and appealed to London Tribunals. His concerns primarily relate to the fairness of pursuing him for six PCNs and the adequacy of the Council’s signage warning of the restrictions he contravened.
The Council has explained it is the motorist’s duty to ensure they comply with any restrictions that are in place and this is correct. Mr X suggests it is not fair for the Council to rely on the restrictions as he believes the Council’s signs are inadequate. But London Tribunals has considered the adequacy of the signs as part of Mr X’s appeal. We cannot therefore investigate the matter further.
Final decision
We cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of his representations against the PCNs. This is because Mr X has used his right of appeal to London Tribunals.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman