The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Transport for London’s handling of his appeal against a penalty charge notice. This is because there is no evidence of fault causing Mr X significant injustice.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains he was unfairly treated by Transport for London (TfL) regarding his appeal against a penalty charge notice (PCN).
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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and Transport for London.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
TfL issued Mr X a PCN for a moving traffic contravention in late 2021. Mr X disputes the PCN and made representations against it to TfL.
TfL rejected Mr X’s representations and served Mr X a ‘notice of rejection’ setting out his right to appeal to London Tribunals. However when Mr X wrote to request an appeal he wrote to TfL, rather than London Tribunals, in error.
TfL wrote back to Mr X rejecting his representations for a second time and by the time Mr X had realised his mistake he was out of time to appeal to London Tribunals. Mr X believes this is unfair.
My assessment
There is no evidence of fault by TfL in this matter and London Tribunals has now agreed to consider Mr X’s appeal outside its normal timescales. He has therefore not suffered any significant injustice for which we would recommend a remedy.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by TfL and the matter has not caused Mr X significant injustice in any event.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman