Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Transport for London

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 21-014-437 Sector Transport And Highways Category Parking And Other Penalties Decided 31 January 2022

View Transport for London scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Transport for London’s handling of several penalty charge notices for entering the ultra-low emission zone without paying the charge. This is because Transport for London has agreed to Mrs X’s request to accept payment at the original discounted rate and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for Mrs X.

The complaint

The complainant, Mrs X, complains about several penalty charge notices (PCNs) issued by Transport for London (TfL) for entering the ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) without paying the charge. She says TfL failed to respond to her queries and initial representations against the PCNs until they had progressed to the next stage of the process, increasing the amount owed.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Authority.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mrs X does not dispute the validity of the PCNs issued by TfL; she accepts she drove in the ULEZ without paying the charge but says this was because she did not know about it, rather than because she was trying to avoid paying. She says she made representations to TfL but did not receive any response until later when the cases were escalated and the amounts owed increased.

TfL wrote to Mrs X on 28 October 2021 demanding payment at the rate of £248 per PCN and confirming it had registered the unpaid PCNs as a debt with the Traffic Enforcement Centre (TEC) at Northampton County Court. Mrs X is unhappy TfL escalated the cases and wants it to reduce the amount owed to the original discounted rate of £80 per PCN.

TfL responded to Mrs X’s complaint on 19 January 2022 confirming it had issued the PCNs and escalated the cases properly. It also agreed to place a hold on further enforcement action until 14 February and to accept £80 per PCN if paid by this date. This represents a reduction of more than £160 per PCN and takes the cost back to the original discounted rate.

In the circumstances it is unlikely further investigation would achieve anything more for Mrs X as she accepts the contraventions and there is no requirement for TfL to cancel the PCNs.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint. This is because TfL has agreed to accept payment at the original discounted rate of £80 per PCN and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for her.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Transport for London

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-013-058 Other
25-022-808 Other
25-022-027 Other
25-020-343 Other
25-028-120 Other
View all decisions for this organisation