The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the vehicle scrappage scheme because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Authority.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says he applied to scrap two vans under the scrappage scheme but the Authority only awarded a payment for one van. He does not think the Authority reviewed all the documents.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Authority. This includes the correspondence about the applications and the evidence submitted by Mr X. I considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.
My assessment
Mr X applied to scrap two vans under the scrappage scheme. The Authority confirmed in June 2020 that both vans were eligible for the scheme. It explained that within six months Mr X must provide evidence of scrapping the vans and of buying new vans.
Mr X provided the evidence for one van and received a payment. The Authority decided he had not satisfied the evidence requirements for the second van. This was for various reasons including that Mr X initially provided proof of purchase of a new van for a date before he received the confirmation letter (the new van must be purchases after the letter). Mr X then provided proof of a new van which was the same van he had purchased to get the payment for the other application. Mr X then provided other evidence but there were discrepancies with some of the documents; for example, the vehicle registration mark had been edited.
Mr X provided more evidence in June 2021 but the Authority rejected this as more than six months had passed since it issued the eligibility letter.
Mr X says he initially sent the wrong evidence but then sent the correct information which the Authority disregarded.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Authority. The Authority considered all the documents but the evidence either did not meet the requirements or was submitted after the deadline. There is nothing to suggest the Authority ignored some of the evidence and there is no reason to start an investigation.
Final decision
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Authority.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman