There is currently a problem with our online complaint service. This means you are not able to register a new complaint or look at any existing complaints. We are working to fix. Sorry for the inconvenience.
Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties Decision : Closed after initial enquiries Decision date : 02 Jul 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty charge notice as ultimately Mrs X could have asked the court to consider her case.
The complaint
Mrs X complains she was issued with a parking penalty charge notice (PCN) due to poor signage at the location she parked. Mrs X says she did not receive the PCN or the notice to owner (NtO), and paid the fine on receipt of the charge certificate. Mrs X feels the fine was disproportionate for a motorcycle user.
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 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Parliament has put in place a redress procedure when something goes wrong with the enforcement of a PCN. In Mrs X’s case, as she says she was not aware of the PCN prior to receiving the charge certificate, she could have asked the court at the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) to consider her case, which if accepted, would have led to her being given the right to appeal against the PCN. Mrs X could have done this once the Council had sent her the next notice in the enforcement procedure, the order for recovery. Mrs X however paid the fine and so lost the right to make any further challenge.
As this is the procedure provided in law, it is reasonable to expect Mrs X to have followed it, to make her case against the PCN enforcement. We are not an alternative appeal stage in this process, and we are not empowered to make the decisions the TEC can.
I recognise Mrs X remains unhappy that the PCN was the same for her motorcycle as it would have been for a car. This would be a policy decision for the Council to make and it is unlikely we would be able to challenge it.
For these reasons, we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect her to have asked the court to consider her case against the enforcement of the PCN.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman