The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Miss Y complained, on behalf of her friend Miss A, the Council issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) to her for parking on a red route. However, Miss Y says she was parked beyond the red lines.
Miss A paid the penalty of £35 to avoid the amount increasing, however, she feels the penalty was unfair as she has seen others parked in the same place without PCNs being issued.
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information Miss Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council issued a PCN to Miss A in August 2022 when it says she had parked on a red route. Miss A says she did not park on the red route lines and had parked using a Blue Badge. She also says she did not see signage to make her aware of restrictions. However, despite this, she chose to pay the penalty of £35 within the 14-day discounted period, to avoid the penalty increasing.
Miss A then wrote to the Council to complain. The Council responded shortly afterwards, saying that despite considering the circumstances Miss A had raised it would not withdraw the PCN. It also said signage in the area met with required standards and provided information about the use of the Blue Badge on red routes. Miss Y then approached us in September.
Analysis Miss A paid the penalty for the PCN. In doing so, she also admitted liability for the parking contravention the PCN was issued for. She also waived her right to appeal the PCN to either through representations to the Council or to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
As Miss A has admitted liability for the parking contravention and chosen not to use the right of appeal, it is unlikely we would find the Council at fault for issuing the PCN, despite Miss A’s statement that she was not parked on the red route. Further, the Council has considered her circumstances before concluding that it will not revoke the PCN. Consequently, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman