The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council’s bailiff is taking enforcement action to recover a penalty charge notice debt. There is no fault in the Council’s bailiff pursuing the debt. We cannot investigate earlier actions because Ms X used her right of appeal to the County Court’s Traffic Enforcement Centre.
The complaint
Ms X complains the Council is pursuing her for a penalty charge notice debt. She says the Council has not given her an opportunity to pay the debt. She says the Council’s bailiff visited her old address in the summer where she no longer lives. Ms X says the Council has caused embarrassment, distress, and confusion. She wants the Council to stop the bailiff action and allow her to settle the debt.
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, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a tribunal or a government minister or started court action about the matter. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information and comments provided by the complainant and Council.
My assessment
I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint for the following reasons: There is no fault by the Council and its bailiff in pursuing the unpaid penalty charge notice (PCN) debt. The Council has a valid debt recovery order, has sent notifications to the correct address, and is entitled to recover the costs set out in law: In December 2021, the County Court’s Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) cancelled its first debt recovery order. It accepted Ms X’s statutory declaration that she had not received the penalty charge notice (PCN) issued in August 2021. The TEC decision warns Ms X revocation of the debt recovery order does not cancel the PCN. It advised Ms X to contact the Council about the PCN, but she did not do so.
On 14 June 2022, the bailiff sent Ms X an enforcement notice explaining she had until 5 July to pay the debt of £279 (£204 plus compliance fee of £75). The notice provides details of how to pay. It warns failure to pay will incur an enforcement fee of £235. On 22 June 2022 Ms X sent an email saying she had received the enforcement notice. The email says she had not had any contact since the TEC decision in January 2022 and she believed (mistakenly) that the court had cancelled the PCN.
On 1 July 2022, the bailiff wrote to Ms X warning ‘action to continue’. Details are given about how to pay including by post, online, or by card.
On 18 July 2022 Ms X signed a further statutory declaration to the TEC. The declaration says Ms X is still living at her old address to which the bailiff had written. It says she had not received any correspondence between the TEC’s earlier decision and a bailiff visit on 13 July. In September the TEC rejected Ms X’s out of time declaration. This means the Council is entitled to pursue the debt which was then £514.
The Ombudsman cannot investigate a complaint where a right of appeal to a court has been used (see paragraphs 3 and 4 above). This means we cannot investigate the handling of the PCN case and recovery order. Ms X used her right of appeal to the County Court’s TEC and had a right of review before a judge against the TEC decision not to accept her July statutory declaration.
There are no grounds for the Ombudsman to find fault with the Council regarding the bailiff enforcement actions. Ms X is required to pay the costs or further action may be taken against her.
Final decision
The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint the Council’s bailiff is taking enforcement action to recover a penalty charge notice debt. There is no fault in the Council’s bailiff pursuing the debt. We cannot investigate earlier actions because Ms X used her right of appeal to the County Court’s Traffic Enforcement Centre.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman