The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Miss X’s complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because the Council responded appropriately to her representations and it was reasonable to expect her to use her appeal rights to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the way the Council handled a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN).
Miss X accepts she paid after the 14-day discount period had expired but says she paid £35 through the Council's online payment portal in good faith. She complains the portal accepted the payment without warning that it was an underpayment or that enforcement would continue.
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 Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.
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 which includes the Council’s response.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X is concerned the Council failed to adequately address her concerns about the design of the payment system, leading to continued enforcement action, additional fees and distress.
The Council considered her representations and issued a Notice of Rejection. It explained the PCN clearly stated that the discounted amount of £35 was only available within 14 days and that, after that period, the full £70 charge applied.
The Council noted payment of £35 was made 21 days after the PCN was issued. It further explained that its payment portal is a global payment system which accepts the amount entered by the payer and has no way of determining the outstanding balance on an individual case. The Notice of Rejection also informed Miss X of her right to appeal to the independent Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has provided a satisfactory response to the concerns raised. And it was reasonable to expect Miss X to use her right to appeal to an independent tribunal.
The Council's Notice of Rejection advised Miss X of her right to appeal to the independent Traffic Penalty Tribunal. This is the legal body established to consider disputes about PCNs.
The Ombudsman normally expects a person to use the appeal rights available to them. The Tribunal was able to consider matters arising from the PCN and the Council's decision to reject representations. As an independent appeal remedy was available, and as the Council provided a reasoned response to the issues raised, we would not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Council responded appropriately to her. And it was reasonable to expect her to use her right to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman