The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Transport for London’s handling of four ultra-low emission zone contraventions. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Authority.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains Transport for London (TfL) refused to allow him to pay the ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) charge of £12.50 instead of the penalty charge amount of £160, reduced to £80 per penalty charge notice (PCN) for the first 14 days.
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 Mr X and the Authority.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X accepts he drove in the ULEZ without paying the charge. TfL was therefore entitled to issue him PCNs and under no obligation to accept payment of the charge in settlement of the matter. It properly considered Mr X’s representations against the PCNs and explained its reasons for not cancelling them. The process and charges were in accordance with the relevant Charging Order and there is no evidence of fault by TfL in its handling of Mr X’s case.
TfL has however now agreed to accept payment from Mr X at the original ULEZ charging rate of £12.50 per PCN and it will therefore refund Mr X £270 as requested.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by TfL.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman