Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Cumbria County Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 22-006-684 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 22 September 2022

View Cumbria County Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of Penalty Charge notices. This is because the complaint is late with no good reason to investigate now.

The complaint

Mr Y complained the Council sent letters about the enforcement of several Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) to his previous addresses.

This led to Mr Y being unaware of the enforcement by bailiffs of the charges and the costs of this action increasing.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

How I considered this complaint

I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The Council issued PCNs to Mr Y in 2012, 2014 and 2019. Mr Y challenged all the PCNs with the Council and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT) but was unsuccessful. He then made an agreement with the Council to pay the penalties at a lower amount and in instalments over a period in 2018. Mr Y then moved address in November 2019. Following his move, the Council continued to send correspondence to Mr Y’s previous address.

In discussion with us about his complaint, Mr Y told us he became aware the Council was sending letters about the collection of the penalty debts to his previous address, and to his mother’s property where he had previously lived, approximately 18 months ago, in spring 2021. He complained to the Council about the problem in August, and then approached us.

Analysis The law says people should normally complain to us within 12 months of becoming aware of an issue. Complaints brought to the Ombudsman more than 12 months after someone becomes aware of something a council has done are considered late. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons.

Mr Y’s was aware of his reason to complain about the Council’s actions when he realised it was sending letters to his previous addresses more than 12 months ago. He has confirmed this to us on the telephone. Consequently, his complaint is now late.

We have discretion to disapply the rule outlined in paragraph four where we decide there are good reasons. Mr Y has not provided any good reasons why he did not bring his complaint to us within 12 months of knowing about the matter. It is reasonable to expect him to have complained to us sooner. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is late with no good reason to investigate it now.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Cumbria County Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
22-011-436 20 Dec 2022 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about faulty signals at a pedestrian crossing. This is because the issue has … Other
22-009-060 19 Dec 2022 Summary: Mrs X complains the Council delayed investigating her complaint at stage two of the children’s statutory complaints procedure. She … Upheld
22-008-363 19 Dec 2022 Summary: We found fault by the Council on Mrs J’s complaint about the appeal panel failing to follow procedure when … Upheld
22-012-105 02 Dec 2022 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about damage caused to Mr X’s fence allegedly arising from the Council’s actions … Other
21-009-380 21 Nov 2022 Summary: Mr C complained about the Council’s response to various highways matters which he says caused him avoidable distress and … Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation