The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Ms B has complained that TfL did not properly handle her request for a residents’ discount on the Congestion Charge. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way that TfL considered her request.
The complaint
Ms B complains that Transport for London failed to respond to her request to transfer her later father’s Congestion Charge account to her name. As a result, she has had to pay the full Congestion Charge. She says the Council should change the account to her name and refund the additional charges she has had to pay.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) If we are satisfied with a council’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)
How I considered this complaint
I have considered Ms B’s written complaint and supporting correspondence and discussed her complaint with her. I have considered comments and correspondence from TfL. I have also sent Ms B and the Council a draft decision and invited their comments.
What I found
TfL operates a Congestion Charge scheme within Central London whereby vehicles operating within the changing zone between specific hours must pay a daily charge.
Residents could previously apply for a 90% residents' discount. To qualify for the discount, they had to meet certain conditions. These included that: their main or permanent home must be within the Congestion Charge residents' discount zone, and must be used for residential purposes; they must be at least 17 years old, and have their name on either the Parliamentary or local government electoral register; vehicles must be registered with the DVLA in the applicant’s name and at the same address; a company or lease vehicle may be registered if it is for the resident’s sole use.
Ms B lived at the same address as her late father, Mr B. Both used the same car which was registered with the DVLA in Mr B’s name. Ms B was the named owner on the payment plan with the manufacturer and on the car insurance.
Mr B and the car were registered for the Congestion Charge. Ms B says she was also named on her late father’s Congestion Charge account due to his hearing and speech impairment, and her email address and bank account were linked to his account.
Mr B sadly died suddenly in February 2020. This badly affected Ms B and she was prescribed medication for depression and received counselling. Her counsellor and a family member advised her to update the car ownership details.
Ms B contacted the DVLA in May/June 2020 to change the vehicle registration. She says she also wrote to TfL at the same time advising of her father’s death and asking TfL to transfer the account into her name. She says she had provided a copy of the interim death certificate as her father’s death had been subject to an inquest. She says received no response from TfL.
TfL, however, says that an application for the Resident’s Discount was made in May 2020 using proof documents in Mr B’s name, three months after he had passed away, and it was not until April 2021 that TfL was informed that Mr B had passed away. TfL granted a residents’ discount in June 2020 and the account and discount remained active in Mr B’s name.
From 1 August 2020, TfL temporarily closed the Congestion Charge discount scheme to new applicants. Ms B received confirmation from the DVLA of the change of ownership in August/September 2020.
Ms B continued to use the car and pay the discounted charge until April 2021, when her aunt came and drove in London. She tried to pay her aunt’s congestion charge on her own account, as this was an easier to pay. She then called TfL to check if the payment had gone through and learnt that the account had not been transferred into her name.
TfL advised Ms B that, as her father had passed away, it would have to close the account. Any previously registered vehicles would no longer be covered but could be registered under a separate account for Ms B or another party. It also explained that the discount scheme was temporarily closed to new applicants.
Ms B complained to TfL. She also made a Freedom of Information request about Congestion Charge residents’ discounts. TfL explained that it had exercised discretion to allow some renewal applications received in the three months following the suspension of the discount. This applied where a resident had previously held the discount, but this had expired and they were now applying to renew. TfL had also processed some new applications from December 2020 to March 2021 on a discretionary basis.
Ms B also asked for a final response from TfL to her request to transfer the account and discount. She reiterated why she considered that TfL should transfer the account and discount. She also explained that she had been unable to apply for the discount as the car was still registered in her late father’s name.
TfL explained that it received an application for the residents’ discount in May 2020 using proof documents in Mr B’s name. It explained that it was not notified at the time that Mr B had died, so it had granted the discount in June 2020. It confirmed that applying for a discount using the documents of a deceased person is not permitted. It also explained that it could not transfer the account, but that Ms B could have opened a new account and added the vehicle later on. However, she would not be able to obtain a discount at present while the scheme was closed.
My assessment
I have considered whether there has been fault by TfL in respect of Ms B’s request to allow her the residents’ discount.
Ms B says she provided a copy of her late father’s interim death certificate when contacting TfL in May/June 2020 and asked to transfer the account. However, TfL says it received no notification that Mr B had passed away until April 2021, but instead it received an application in Mr B’s name which it duly processed and renewed. I note that Ms B says she could not apply in her own name because the vehicle registration had not been transferred to her.
It is unclear why TfL does not have a copy of the request to transfer the account which Ms B has explained that she sent. But in any event, TfL has explained that it would also not have been possible for the account and discount to be transferred after Mr B had passed away. Besides, TfL has explained that Ms B could instead have set up her own account and then added the vehicle.
I do not consider that there is evidence of fault in the way that TfL processed the application. Moreover, I note that Ms B then had the use of the account and discount until April 2021, despite that not being valid.
I appreciate that Ms B considers that TfL should use its discretion to allow her the discount. However, it is for TfL to decide whether to do so.
TfL has considered Ms B’s request and the information that she has put forward in support of this but, having regard to all the circumstances, has declined to agree to her request. It is not for the Ombudsman to question the merits of that decision.
Final decision
I have closed my investigation because I have not found fault in the way that TfL dealt with Ms B’s request to allow her a residents’ discount.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman