The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice she received for an alleged moving traffic contravention. This is because it was reasonable for Ms B to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
The complaint
Ms B complains the Council wrongly issued her with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged moving traffic contravention. Ms B says the Council was wrong to issue this PCN because the yellow box road markings were very worn and faded. Ms B also says the Council did not respond to her requests for a review after she paid the PCN.
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) London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms B.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms B put in formal representations to the Council against this PCN. The Council rejected Ms B’s representations. The Council was satisfied this PCN was correctly issued. The Council advised Ms B she could either pay the PCN at the discounted rate of £65 or pursue the matter further by putting in an appeal to London Tribunals. The Council explained that if Miss B’s appeal was not successful she would have to pay the full charge of £130.
Ms B then paid the PCN at the discounted rate of £65. Ms B later asked the Council to review this PCN on two occasions but the Council did not respond and later told her it was too late to ask for a review.
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about this PCN. If Ms B wanted to challenge this PCN she could have put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
We generally expect this right of appeal to be used if a motorist is challenging a PCN. The process is free to use and the tribunal, which is independent, has the power to cancel a PCN. I find it was reasonable for Ms B to do this.
Ms B says it is unfair that putting in an appeal risks the fine increasing. But, local authorities are allowed to offer payment of the PCN at a discounted rate during the early stages of the process. The discount period is no longer available once an appeal is made. This is not evidence of fault.
The Council was not at fault for not responding to Ms B’s further requests for a review once she paid the PCN. This is because the Council had already considered her representations and the PCN was cancelled once Ms B paid it.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms B’s complaint because it was reasonable for her to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman