The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a parking contravention as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed against it, ultimately to the parking adjudicators at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Mr X complains he should not have been issued a penalty charge notice (PCN) for parking in a bay and displaying his blue badge. Mr X says he was advised by a Council officer that he could park there, and he wants to be reimbursed with the money he paid to clear the PCN.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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 rejected Mr X’s initial representations against the PCN but asked him to provide further detail about the person he had spoken to so, the Council could investigate. The Council says Mr X did not provide further information but paid the PCN.
The law provides an appeal procedure which Mr X could have used to challenge the PCN. This would have culminated in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) had the Council decided not to cancel the PCN.
It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have made such an appeal and therefore, as per paragraph two, we will not investigate. That Mr X chose to pay the PCN does not impact upon this.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have appealed against the PCN using the statutory appeal process.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman