The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by the Council. This is because the Council has already provided a satisfactory remedy and there are no wider public interest issues that justify investigating.
The complaint
Mr X complained that the Council wrongly issued him a PCN while he was parked in an electric vehicle (EV) charging bay and that it failed to properly consider his representations. He said this caused him distress when enforcement action followed.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council investigated Mr X’s complaint and found the PCN was issued correctly. It said the EV charging bay was for people with either resident or visitors permits. However, it agreed this wasn’t properly explained to Mr X, meaning the matter could have been resolved earlier.
The Council apologised and cancelled the PCN and notified enforcement agency of this. Mr X had already paid outstanding fees at this point, and the Council has agreed to refund him fully.
These actions amount to a satisfactory remedy. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has provided a satisfactory remedy and there are no wider public interest issues remaining that would justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman