The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about two penalty charge notices issued by the Council. This is because the Council has cancelled the penalty charge notices and it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal against them to London Tribunals.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council is pursuing him for payment of two penalty charge notices (PCNs) which result from errors with its automated numberplate recognition system .
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended) The law 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) London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council has issued Mr X several PCNs for contraventions committed by a third party in a vehicle he does not own and has never owned. Mr X says the Council’s automated system misread the first letter of the car’s numberplate from its photographs and although it cancelled the first PCN it issued it refused to cancel two more and is pursuing him for payment.
In response to our enquiries the Council has confirmed it has now cancelled the remaining PCNs and will take no further action in respect of them. This provides a suitable remedy for the issue and it is unlikely we would recommend anything more.
In the event the Council issues any further PCNs Mr X should make representations to the Council and, if it rejects them, we would expect him to appeal. While Mr X considers none of the statutory grounds apply in his case he would be able to argue the contravention did not occur or that he was not the owner of the vehicle shown in the Council’s photos.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has cancelled the PCNs and this provides a suitable remedy for Mr X. Mr X also had a right of appeal against the PCNs which it would have been reasonable for him to use.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman