The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice for an alleged parking contravention. This is because it is reasonable for Mrs B to make formal representations, and if needed, put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
The complaint
Mrs B says the Council wrongly issued her with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) for an alleged parking contravention outside her home.
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 Mrs B.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council has rejected Mrs B’s informal representations in response to this PCN. Mrs B may challenge this PCN further by waiting for the Council to send her a Notice to Owner and then putting in formal representations to the Council. If the Council again rejects Mrs B’s representations, she may put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
This is the process set out in law for a person to challenge a PCN and we generally expect it to be used. The tribunal is independent and the process is free and relatively straightforward.
I find it is reasonable for Mrs B to use this process and if needed, put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
So, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because it is reasonable for her to put in an appeal to London Tribunals.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman