Summary: Mr X complained the Council issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice and towed and impounded his car without proper cause. The Council was at fault for failing to record Mr X’s car details correctly. The Council has already apologised to Mr X and cancelled all charges, and this is sufficient to remedy any uncertainty and distress this caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council incorrectly issued him with a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and towed and impounded his car without proper cause.
2. Mr X says the matter has caused distress and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal 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 appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
5. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.
6. When considering complaints, if there is a conflict of evidence, we make findings based on the balance of probabilities. This means that we will weigh up the available relevant evidence and base our findings on what we think was more likely to have happened.
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I spoke with Mr X and considered information he provided.
9. I considered information provided by the Council.
10. Mr X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on the draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

11. In August 2022 Mr X parked his car on a street in the Council’s area. The following day he found his car was missing. He contacted the ‘towed vehicle tracing’ service for London and was told his car had not been towed.
12. Mr X checked a neighbour’s CCTV. He found his car was taken by a towing company. Mr X contacted the car tracing service and a car matching his vehicle’s description was found, but with a different Vehicle Registration Number (VRN). Mr X says he attempted to contact the towing company acting on behalf of the Council several times to discuss the matter but could not speak with a member of staff.
13. Mr X then visited the car impound site. He found the Council had issued a Penalty Charge Notice (PCN) and requested the towing company to impound the car, however his VRN had been incorrectly recorded on the PCN.
14. Mr X discussed the matter with the Council, and in response the Council cancelled the PCN and impound charges. Mr X said the car was returned to him within 48 hours.
15. Mr X wrote to the Council and complained. He said:
• The car impound staff told him the parking marks on the street were faded and the double yellow lines were incomplete, therefore in its opinion, his car should not have been towed.
• The matter had caused him frustration and distress and had caused him to miss two days’ work.
• He had been unable to speak with anyone at the Council about the matter on the day and no one answered his calls.
16. The Council responded in mid-August 2022 and told Mr X:
• The Civil Enforcement Officer (CEO) had mistakenly recorded his VRN incorrectly on the PCN paperwork. This led to the delay in locating his car.
• His vehicle was seen parked on the footway and the PCN was issued as a result.
• It acknowledged his difficulties in contacting its services and said it had reminded staff about the importance of being available for public calls.
• The CEO that issued the PCN was reminded about the importance of accurately recording information.
• If Mr X wanted to claim for loss of earnings, he could do so by submitting a claim to the Council’s insurance team. The Council provided contact details for the insurance team.
• The Council apologised for the inconvenience caused and informed him he could escalate the matter if he remained dissatisfied.
17. Mr X remained dissatisfied and brought the complaint to us.
18. In response to our enquiries, the Council said it had reconsidered the matter and found there were markings on the footway which indicated the area allowed parking on the path in some areas, but these were now faded and unclear. There were also double yellow lines nearby, but these did not have a T bar to indicate where they end. As a result, if Mr X had taken the matter to tribunal, the Council would have accepted the representation that the parking bay was not clearly defined, and it would have refunded any charges.

Analysis

Penalty Charge Notice

19. The Council issued Mr X with a PCN because he was parked in contravention on the footway. This was a decision the enforcement officer was entitled to make at the time. Even though the Council said it would have conceded the appeal, that does not mean it was fault at the time to issue the PCN. The Council decided to cancel the PCN and all associated charges within 48 hours of issuing it.

Record keeping

20. The Council failed to accurately record Mr X’s VRN when it issued the PCN and subsequently towed his car. This is poor record keeping and is fault. The fault caused Mr X distress and uncertainty about the location of his vehicle and delayed him finding his vehicle until the following day.
21. The Council has already apologised to Mr X and cancelled the PCN and all charges related to the towing of his vehicle. This is sufficient to remedy the time and trouble, uncertainty and distress caused by the fault.
22. The Council has explained service improvements it has made, including reminding its contractors of the need to be contactable by the public and reminding staff of the importance of accurate record keeping. These are appropriate actions to ensure the fault does not reoccur.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I completed my investigation. I have found fault and the Council has already apologised for any injustice this caused.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman