Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained the Council failed to allow additional time for her husband to make representations against Penalty Charge Notices (PCNs) due to a need for reasonable adjustments and increased the amount charged for the PCNs. MRs Y says this caused upset and worry and she is now expected to pay nearly £400 which she cannot afford.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information Mrs Y provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs Y has a right to submit a statutory declaration to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), asking it to remove the charge certificates for the PCNs and explain why she was unable to appeal earlier. If the TEC accepts Mrs Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCNs back to their original amount and reinstating Mrs Y’s right of appeal against it to the Council initially and then the London Tribunals. Mrs Y can then decide if she wishes to appeal the PCNs or pay the penalties.
6. The London Tribunals can consider how the Council dealt with Mrs Y’s appeal, and whether it followed the correct process in considering her representations. If it finds that it did not consider her representations properly, it can then consider the issues Mrs Y has raised as the reasons why the PCN is either invalid or should not be enforced.
7. This is often free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mrs Y has not provided any other reason why she cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to use this right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mrs Y to appeal to the Traffic Enforcement Centre and the London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman