The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint that she was wrongly issued with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Miss B to put in formal representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Miss B complains the Council wrongly issued her with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention. Miss B says the restrictions were not clearly signed and there were special circumstances why she could not return to her car earlier. Miss B says the Council did not give proper consideration to her representations and she had to pay this PCN to avoid the risk of the charge doubling.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The Act 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) 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 provided by Miss B.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
There is a process set out in law for a motorist to challenge a PCN for an alleged parking contravention. This involves the motorist putting in representations to the local authority, and if needed, putting in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (for authorities outside London). We generally expect this process to be used.
The Council rejected Miss B’s informal representations against this PCN. Miss B then paid this PCN to cancel it.
Rather than pay this PCN, Miss B could have waited for the Council to send her a Notice to Owner. Miss B could have then put in formal representations, and if needed, appeal to the Tribunal.
I find it was reasonable for Miss B to use this process. The Tribunal is independent of the Council and in the best position to decide whether a PCN was correctly issued. The process is free and relatively straightforward to use.
So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss B’s complaint because it was reasonable for her to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman