The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about enforcement of a penalty charge notice as it has been considered in court and is no longer within our remit.
The complaint
Mrs X complained Transport for London (TfL) passed an Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) penalty charge notice (PCN) it had issued to her to its enforcement agents. Mrs X says she paid the PCN but despite this enforcement action continued. Mrs X wants TfL to accept her payment and cancel the enforcement action.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The courts have said that where someone has sought a remedy by way of proceedings in any court of law, we cannot investigate. This is the case even if the appeal did not or could not provide a complete remedy for all the injustice claimed. (R v The Commissioner for Local Administration ex parte PH (1999) EHCA Civ 916)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Parliament has provided a mechanism by which Mrs X was able to ask the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), which is part of the county court system, to consider the issues she raises with how the PCN issued to her has been enforced. The TEC rejected Mrs X’s case.
As the court, the TEC, has considered this case, we can no longer investigate, as per paragraph two. We are not another level of appeal in the PCN enforcement process, and we cannot look at decisions made by the TEC.
Final decision
We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it has been considered in court and is no longer within our remit.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman