Summary
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because he could have followed the statutory process and appealed to a tribunal. And it was reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed this process.
The complaint
In short, Mr X complains about the Council’s failure to properly consider his objections to receiving a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN). He says the PCN was unfairly issued as he broke down due to sudden mechanical failure and not due to any personal fault such as not maintaining his car in good condition. Mr X wants the PCN cancelled.
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 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 the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
After receiving the PCN, Mr X made representations to the Council. The Council rejected Mr X’s representations.
Based on the evidence I have seen, Mr X has not appealed to the London Tribunals. We would expect Mr X to use this statutory route to challenge the PCN. We will not investigate this complaint because, where a right of appeal to a tribunal or court exists, we would normally expect it to be used.
Final decision
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about receiving a Penalty Charge Notice. This is because he could have followed the statutory process and appealed to a tribunal. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed this process.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman