The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Miss Y complains the Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for driving in a Clean Air Zone (CAZ) without paying the daily charge. Miss Y says she did not see the signs ass he was concentrating on directions as a visitor to the area.
Miss Y says she has paid the fine, but feels she should not have been charged when she was unaware of the zone before going into it. This has caused her upset.
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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss Y entered the Council’s CAZ in December 2021. Miss Y says she was busy following directions on a sat nav as she is not local to the area. Consequently, she did not see the signage about the CAZ and drove through the CAZ without paying the £8 daily charge. Miss Y then received a PCN asking her to pay £60 or appeal the PCN. Miss Y paid the PCN.
Miss Y complained to the Council. The Council replied in January 2022, saying that it has advertised the clean air zone locally, but explained further advertising nationally was led by a third party as part of central government and agreed to pass Miss Y’s comments on to them. It also said it had posted signs across the area, both before and as drivers enter the CAZ. Consequently, it would expect Miss Y to have considered these signs while driving. Miss Y then contacted us in February.
Analysis The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London. Miss Y has explained to us that she would like the PCN to be reviewed, however this would be the role of the tribunal and not the Ombudsman. However, as Miss Y has paid the PCN she has also admitted liability for the PCN.
Miss Y says that she did not see the signs while she was driving in the area as she was following her sat nav and concentrating on directions as she was unfamiliar with the area. However, the Council’s response indicates that there are signs to warn drivers in the area. These are placed both before and as drivers enter the CAZ.
As these signs are in place and the Council has acted to make drivers aware of the zone and the charge to drive within it, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council issuing a PCN to Miss Y. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman