The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
The complaint
Mr Y complained the Authority has failed to provide him a response to his representations against a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and have increased the amount with added cost now the matter has passed to bailiffs.
Mr Y says he is worried about bailiffs attending his home and says he is unable to afford the higher charges. He also says the issue has affected his mental health.
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 has a right of appeal, reference or review to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to use this right. (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 Mr Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr Y has told us that he would like the PCN to be sent back to the Authority and the amount reduced back to the original fine amount if his appeal has not been accepted.
Mr 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. This can be done even if Mr Y has paid bailiffs under duress. 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 Authority initially and then the London Tribunals. Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service.
Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal. Therefore, 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 approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman