Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint requesting a financial remedy due to the Council issuing him with penalty charge notices, in error. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Council has provided a remedy by cancelling the notices so there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council issuing him with several penalty charge notices (PCNs) in error. Mr X says this is due to an internal Council error failing to register parking zones correctly.
2. Mr X complains he has been put to some time and trouble appealing the PCNs. He would like to be compensated £40.00.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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)
6. 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. We will not investigate. The Ombudsman does not recommend payments just for complainants’ time and trouble incurred when raising a complaint to the Council. In this case, the Council remedied Mr X’s injustice - after he raised an informal challenge to it - by cancelling the PCNs. Therefore, I do not see evidence of a significant injustice to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.
10. It is worth pointing out there are statutory appeal rights attached to parking tickets. This would be the normal avenue to pursue if someone wishes to appeal against the issuing of a PCN. And the Parking Adjudicator does not award financial remedies for time and trouble taken to appeal.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman