The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about Transport for London’s escalation of a penalty charge notice for a congestion charge contravention. This is because the authority has agreed to the remedy Miss X requested and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for her.
The complaint
The complainant, Miss X, complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by Transport for London (TfL). She says she received no reminder or opportunity to pay the original fee and that TfL’s online payment service did not work. She sent TfL an email but received no response.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Miss X and TfL.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
TfL has apologised for the inconvenience caused when Miss X tried to pay the PCN online but it considers it followed the proper process in issuing and escalating the PCN. It has agreed to refund £169 of Miss X’s payment and has retained the discounted penalty charge of £80, which is what Miss X asked for. This provides a suitable remedy for the complaint and it is unlikely we would recommend anything more.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because TfL has agreed to refund part of Miss X’s payment as requested and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for her.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman