Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 24-004-352 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 25 June 2024

View BCP Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mr C to put in formal representations to the Council, and if needed, appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

Mr C complains the Council has issued him with a parking Penalty Charge Notice (PCN), which contains incorrect information. Mr C says this PCN is void and should be cancelled by the Council.

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 Act says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone has a right of appeal, reference or review 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 use this right. (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 C.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

The Council has considered Mr C’s informal representations but has not cancelled this PCN. The Council says this PCN is valid.

Mr C may now either pay the PCN or wait for the Council to send him a Notice to Owner. The Notice to Owner will give Mr C the opportunity to put in formal representations to the Council to challenge this PCN.

If after considering Mr C’s formal representations, the Council does not cancel the Notice, Mr C may put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Mr C may appeal on the statutory ground that there was procedural impropriety by the Council.

This is the process set out in law to challenge a PCN.

I find it is reasonable for Mr C to use this process. The Tribunal is independent and in the best position to decide whether a PCN was properly issued. Also, the process is free and relatively straightforward to use.

So, we will not investigate this complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr C’s complaint because it is reasonable for him to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Bournemouth, Christchurch and Poole Cou…

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-017-569 Other
25-017-542 Other
25-010-174 Other
25-009-126 Other
25-010-787 Other
View all decisions for this organisation