The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an ultra-low emission zone penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed the appeal procedure provided in law to challenge it.
The complaint
Mr X complains he was unfairly issued a penalty charge notice (PCN) for entering an ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) when he says he was not aware that he needed to pay a charge to do this. Mr X is unhappy as the PCN doubled in cost. Mr X wants Transport for London (TfL) to make sure signage and information provided to motorists is sufficient to enable them to stay within the rules.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
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 statutory appeal process, ultimately to independent adjudicators at London Tribunals, by which Mr X could have challenged the PCN and raised his concerns about warning signage etc. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have used this procedure as it is the lawful process to make such challenges. We do not have the powers of the adjudicators to decide whether inadequate signage means that a PCN should be cancelled. We will not therefore investigate.
After receiving a notice from TfL rejecting the representations he made against the PCN, Mr X had the choice of paying the PCN at the reduced amount or appealing to the Tribunal. Having not taken either of these options, the cost of the PCN doubled. This is not fault by the Council but is the process set out in law.
For these reasons, we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he had the right to appeal the PCN to London Tribunals and it is reasonable to expect him to have done so.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman