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 Miss Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Miss Y complained the Council failed to properly consider her appeal against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). This has led to her being pursued for the penalty and costs amounting to £394 by bailiffs.
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 Miss Y and the Council and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss Y parked in a Council car park in December 2021. She says a stranger approached her after she had bought a ticket and gave her their ticket which still had time remaining on it. Miss Y says she put both tickets in the front of her car, but she received a PCN. Miss Y made both informal and formal representations to the Council, explaining what had happened. The Council did not accept this. It has continued to pursue Miss Y for the penalty, including instructing enforcement agents. Miss Y approached us in September 2022.
Analysis Miss Y has a right to submit a late witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. If the TEC accepts Miss Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Miss Y’s right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service.
Consequently, as Miss Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect her to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and then to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman