The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice because the complainant could have appealed to the tribunal.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). He says the road markings were unclear and obscured by leaves. Mr X wants the Council to stop issuing tickets if the markings are unclear and to refund the £35 he paid.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal about the same matter. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), 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 provided by Mr X. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
If someone disagrees with a PCN they can follow the statutory process and appeal to the tribunal.
The Council issued a PCN for parking during prescribed hours. Mr X challenged the fine and said the road markings were unclear. The Council rejected his challenge. The Council did not agree the markings could not be seen. The Council gave Mr X another opportunity to pay the fine at the reduced rate of £35 or said he could appeal using the Notice to Owner.
Mr X paid £35 but continues the dispute the fine.
I will not investigate this complaint because, rather than paying the fine, Mr X could have followed the statutory process. He could have waited for the Notice to Owner and made a formal challenge. If the Council rejected the formal challenge Mr X could then have appealed to the tribunal and argued that the road markings were unclear. If the tribunal upheld the appeal the adjudicator would have cancelled the fine and might have made comments about the clarity of the road markings. If the tribunal dismissed the appeal Mr X would have been required to pay the fine at the full rate. As Mr X did not appeal and there has been no findings about the road markings, there are no grounds for us to ask the Council to take any action. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have appealed because the tribunal is the appropriate body to consider disputes about PCNs.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because Mr X could have followed the statutory process and appealed to the tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman