Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a parking penalty because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

The complaint

1. Mr Y has complained the Council has wrongly issued a Penalty Charge Notice to him for a parking contravention. Mr Y says the Council’s decision has discriminated against him as a disabled person.
2. Mr Y says the issue has made him feel deeply distressed.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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)
5. The Traffic Penalty Tribunal considers parking and moving traffic offence appeals for all areas of England outside London.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y has made representations against the PCN to the Council. The Council rejected his representations and has explained its rationale for this. It has explained that while Mr Y displayed a blue badge, the vehicle he was travelling in had parked over hatched markings in a car park, which had been put in place to allow space for emergency vehicles to access the site if necessary.
8. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. In this case, Mr Y has a right to submit a witness statement to the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC), based at Northampton County Court, asking it to remove the charge certificate for the PCN.
9. If the TEC accepts Mr Y’s application it can take the process back to an earlier stage, reducing the amount of the PCN and reinstating Mr Y’s right of appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal (TPT). Mr Y can then decide if he wishes to appeal the PCN or pay the penalty. The TPT can consider how the Council dealt with Mr 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.
10. This is free in the initial stages and reasonable adjustments can be made where necessary for access to the service. Consequently, as Mr Y has not provided any other reason why he cannot, it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to use his right to appeal. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because it is reasonable to expect Mr Y to appeal to the Traffic Penalty Tribunal.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman