The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices and related signage. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Mr Y complained about signage on a road which he says was too high for him to identify a restricted zone. Mr Y says this resulted in him receiving 12 Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs), costing him £780. He is also unhappy about the time it took for the Council to deal with his complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) 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.
London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr Y disputes the validity of the PCNs the Council has issued. He has now paid the penalties, in accordance with his company’s policy to stop the amounts from increasing. This is despite his disagreement with it and instead of using his right to appeal it to the London Tribunals. If Mr Y has felt that the signage was inadequate to meet the requirements for a PCN, it is for him as the driver and recipient of the PCN to challenge this.
In deciding not to appeal and paying the penalty, Mr Y has legally accepted his liability for the penalties and the validity of the PCNs. As he has accepted their validity, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s issuing of the PCNs or the related signage. Consequently, we will not investigate.
As we are not investigating the substantive issue, it is not a good use of public resources for us to investigate the way the council dealt with Mr Y’s complaint, and we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman