The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has refused to cancel a penalty charge notice and demands he pay £180. It is reasonable for Mr X to pay the fine or use his legal remedies. He could have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and may challenge further debt recovery at the Traffic Enforcement Centre.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council issued a charge certificate demanding £180 for an unpaid penalty charge notice. Mr X says a vehicle owned by his company was driven into the clean air zone last April. He says the daily charge was paid but unfortunately the wrong number plate details were provided. Mr X wants the Council to cancel the penalty charge notice.
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 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. The information includes the penalty charge notice and related documents. It includes the explanation of what happened sent to the Council, on 6 May, by the partner of one of Mr X’s employees. I have also read the complaint correspondence.
My assessment
I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons: The dispute about the penalty charge notice (PCN, discounted fine £60) is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction (see paragraphs 2 and 3 above). Mr X had an appeal right to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal which is explained in the Council’s PCN which Mr X received in May 2022. The adjudicator can consider mitigation arguments.
The Ombudsman cannot achieve what Mr X wants. The communication to the Council in May 2022 explains the partner of Mr X’s employee mistakenly paid the clean air zone charge for their private vehicle rather than the work van which was driven in the clean air zone. The Council’s reply to the complaint says it would not cancel the PCN because it was not a system error.
If the Council pursues debt enforcement Mr X can reasonably challenge the debt recovery order at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at the County Court. There is a right of review by a Judge on the TEC decision.
Final decision
The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council has refused to cancel a penalty charge notice and demands he pay £180. It is reasonable for Mr X to pay the fine or use his legal remedies. He could have appealed to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal and may challenge further debt recovery at the Traffic Enforcement Centre.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman