The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Mrs Y complained on behalf of her son, Mr D, that the Council has asked Mr D to pay a higher charge for Penalty Charge Notices, after they were not paid by Mr D during the lowered penalty rate period.
Mrs Y says neither she, nor Mr D can afford to make the payment for the increased charges and has asked for the charges to be reduced.
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 Mrs Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In this Council’s area, drivers who enter the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) must pay, unless exempt, a charge of £8 either in the six days before or after they enter the zone. If this is not paid the Council is able to issue a standard penalty charge of £120, if paid within 28 days. This increases if not paid, but if paid within 14 days can be paid at a discounted rate of £60.
The Council issued several PCNs to Mr D in 2021as Mr D had driven in the zone without making payment, until after the period to pay had passed. While it sent the PCNs to Mr D and these were received, Mrs Y has said her son did not understand the significance of the PCNs and had been suffering from distress following three bereavements. Consequently, the PCNs were not paid, and the amounts increased.
Mrs Y then later became aware of the PCNs. She contacted the Council and complained about the increased charges in September 2022. The Council acknowledged Mr D and Mrs Y’s circumstances, but while it did not choose to cancel the PCN under its discretion, did explain Mr D’s rights of appeal. Mrs Y approached us in October.
Analysis As Mr D did not pay the charge within the time frame the Council issued a PCN. It offered a discounted period, but as Mr D did not pay the penalty during this time, the amount increased. As this is set out as part of the charging structure for the Clean Air Zone, there has not been fault in the increase of the charge.
The Council has then considered Mr D and Mrs Y’s circumstances following Mrs Y’s complaint, but chose not to use its discretion to cancel the PCN. As this is a discretionary decision, and the Council did not find the circumstances sufficiently compelling to waive the penalty but did consider Mrs Y’s explanation, it is unlikely we would find fault for it not cancelling the PCN. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman