Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Bury Metropolitan Borough Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-026-472 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 17 February 2026

View Bury Council scorecard

Full decision

on the lessons that can be learnt from our complaints about end of life care given in care homes and in the home.

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties Decision : Closed after initial enquiries Decision date : 17 Feb 2026 The complaint

My assessment

Final decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as it is reasonable to expect the complainant to have appealed against it to the independent tribunal.

The complaint

Mr X complains the Council wrongfully issued him with a parking penalty charge notice (PCN) when, he says, a parking officer had given him permission to park. Mr X says this has caused him to feel anxious. Mr X wants the Council to refund the PCN he paid.

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)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr X made an initial challenge against the PCN, but his challenge was rejected. At this point, the cost of the PCN was discounted and Mr X chose to pay to avoid the cost doubling (the law allows for a discounted charge if payment is made within 14 days). Mr X then sought to challenge the PCN via the Council’s complaint procedure. It had however been open to Mr X not to have paid, and to have continued to challenge the PCN using the appeal procedure provided in law, ultimately to independent parking adjudicators at the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT).

I recognise Mr X paid the PCN to avoid the cost escalating, but the choice is to pay or appeal. I consider it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have followed the appeal process in law, and as per paragraph three, we will not investigate.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect him to have appealed against the PCN to the TPT.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Bury Metropolitan Borough Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-010-224 Upheld
25-019-408 Other
25-020-448 Other
25-014-566 Other
25-011-132 Other
View all decisions for this organisation