The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a Penalty Charge Notice. It is reasonable to expect the complainant to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to seek to regain their appeal rights, and then to appeal to a tribunal.
The complaint
Miss Y says the Council failed to follow the correct procedure for a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) as she did not receive correspondence about the PCN until she was contacted by bailiffs. They say the matter has wrongly progressed through the enforcement procedure and she has now had to make payments through bailiffs.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes limits on what we can investigate.
We cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court or use 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 go to court or appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(6)(a) and (c), as amended) London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London, and the Traffic Penalty Tribunal for the rest of England. The Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), part of the county court, considers applications to set the PCN process back where there has been procedural fault.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information from the complainant and the Council, and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My Assessment
Miss Y says she did not receive the PCN correspondence and only became aware of the PCN at a later stage when the amount had increased significantly. She says this meant she could not appeal the PCN or pay them at a lower rate. She has therefore had to make payments towards the full amount through bailiffs.
Miss Y has a right to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN. If the TEC accepts Miss Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN, refunding the payments for enforcement action and reinstating her right of appeal against it to the Council initially and then the Traffic Penalty Tribunals. Miss Y can then decide if she wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty.
This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service.
Consequently, as Miss Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because it is reasonable to expect the complainant to apply to the Traffic Enforcement Centre to regain their appeal rights, and may then appeal if the TEC agrees.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman