Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Manchester City Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-011-011 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 05 December 2025

View Manchester City Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty because it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

Ms Y complained the Council has wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice to her which she says she does not owe as she had paid for parking.

Ms Y says the problem has caused her upset and anxiety.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 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) 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 Ms Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms Y has complained the Council has wrongly issued her with a PCN for parking without making payment in one of the Council owned car parks. Ms Y disputes the PCN as she says she did pay for the parking and has provided bank statements to us and the Council. This have not been accepted however, and the Council has continued it pursuit of the penalty.

Ms Y has a right to submit a late witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) based at Northampton County Court, asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN.

If the TEC accepts Ms Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal against it to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal. Ms Y can then decide if she wishes to appeal the PCN further or pay the penalty.

This is free in the initial stages, can be done online if required and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service.

Consequently, as Ms Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Ms Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Manchester City Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-018-601 Other
25-014-709 Upheld
25-020-785 Upheld
25-002-304 Upheld
25-006-692 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation