The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council incorrectly issued a Parking Charge Notice to the complainant’s previous address. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, Miss A, complained the Council incorrectly issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for a moving traffic contravention to her previous address.
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, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Miss A has had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making my final decision.
My assessment
Miss A told us she called the Council after the incident to check if her vehicle had been detected by cameras. It said it hadn’t. We would not be able to prove what was said during this conversation.
Miss A told us she applied to the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency (DVLA) for her logbook (the vehicle registration document) to be updated with her new address but the Council issued a PCN to her previous address. The PCN was initially £75. She told us the Council passed on her details to debt collectors who issued a final notice letter to her new address seeking payment of £278. Miss A paid that amount. Miss A has not said she would have appealed against the PCN. She told us she would have paid the £75 if she had been made aware of it. She is seeking a refund.
The Council told Miss A it issued the PCN correctly. It sent the PCN to the address registered by the DVLA at that time. Miss A told us she feels her case has slipped through the net because she was in the middle of moving properties. She said because of this she was not able to update her new address until she had moved in. If a PCN remains unpaid, subsequent enforcement is normally an automated process. There was no requirement on the Council to check the address with the DVLA at subsequent stages of the process. Miss A questioned why the Council was not aware of her new address when she had recently paid for a parking permit. When issuing a PCN, there is no requirement for the Council to check records held by other teams. It was Miss A’s responsibility to make arrangements for the forwarding of post after she moved home.
In this case there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council issued the PCN. This is because the Council issued the document to the address the DVLA had provided and we cannot criticise it for doing so.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss A’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman