The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to challenge the Authority’s decision with the Traffic Enforcement Centre.
The complaint
Miss X is unhappy with Transport for London’s (TfL) decision to increase the Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) charge. She says she did not receive the original 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 law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended).
The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) is part of Northampton County Court. It considers applications from local authorities to pursue payment of unpaid PCNs and from motorists to challenge local authorities’ pursuit of unpaid PCNs.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Authority.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In its response, TfL said it reviewed Miss X’s circumstance and upheld the increased charge. I will not investigate this complaint because it would have been reasonable for Miss X to approach the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC). The TEC is better placed to consider such matters thereby placing it outside our jurisdiction.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it would have been reasonable for her to take the matter to the Traffic Enforcement Centre.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman