The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify investigating.
The complaint
Mrs Y complained the Council’s parking payment machine was not working and she received a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), despite trying to contact the Council by telephone. She also complained that the Council failed to cancel the PCN in the first instance and then did not recognise the time and upset caused to her when she had to appeal the PCN when dealing with her complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Mrs Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs Y parked in the Council’s car park in May 2022. She was unable to use the online parking system as it was not working, and tried to contact the Council by telephone, ending the call after being on hold for ten minutes. She says she paid for the full time she parked, but still received a PCN from the Council. She challenged this informally, but the Council rejected her representations in June.
Mrs Y then contested the PCN again after she received a Notice to Owner in August. The Council then cancelled the PCN in October. Mrs Y complained that it had not considered the upset caused. The Council responded, refusing to pay Mrs Y compensation. Mrs Y approached us at the end of October.
Analysis Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered a serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss of injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
The Council has cancelled the PCN, which has remedied some of the injustice caused to Mrs Y. The remaining injustice Mrs Y has described, the upset and time taken to appeal and complain, is not sufficiently serious or significant enough to justify the use of public resources in investigating. Therefore, we will not investigate.
Further, as we are not investigating the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate how the Council considered Mrs Y’s complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman