Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to cancel several penalty charge notices for driving in a pedestrian zone. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to London Tribunals.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains the Council issued her several penalty charge notices (PCNs) for driving in a pedestrian zone and refused to cancel them following her representations.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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)
4. London Tribunals considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. There is a set procedure councils must follow when pursuing PCNs for moving traffic contraventions. When a council identifies a contravention it will issue a PCN to the owner/registered keeper by post. This will detail the amount of the fine and the motorist’s right of appeal, firstly to the council itself and then to London Tribunals.
7. Mrs X says she paid two of the PCNs but that there are others which she did not pay and which the Council has now escalated. She says she had no alternative but to drive in the pedestrian zone and that she had an exemption from the restriction on driving in the zone because she is a resident and has a child with a disability who qualifies for a blue badge. She wants the Council to cancel the PCNs and refund her payments.
8. If Mrs X disputed the PCNs it would have been reasonable for her to appeal. Mrs X says she did not appeal because there were no grounds for her to do so but if she has a valid exemption from the restriction, contravention of which resulted in the issue of the PCN, she could have appealed on the grounds the contravention did not occur. I have seen nothing to suggest Mrs X queried this with London Tribunals at the time or that it told her she did not have a valid appeal. I have therefore decided not to exercise our discretion to investigate the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mrs X to appeal to London Tribunals.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman