The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Mr B complains the Council wrongly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention. Mr B would like the Council to cancel this 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) 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 B.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council rejected Mr B’s informal representations against this PCN. Once the Council issues Mr B with a Notice to Owner, he may challenge this PCN by putting in formal representations to the Council. If the Council again rejects Mr B’s representations, he may pursue the matter by putting in an appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
This is the process set out in law for a motorist to challenge a PCN and we generally expect it to be used. The Tribunal is independent and has the power to cancel a PCN.
I find it is reasonable for Mr B to put in an appeal to the Tribunal. So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’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