The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Transport for London’s refusal to grant him a travelling showman discount for the Ultra Low Emission Zone. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting the decision.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, complains Transport for London (TfL) has refused to grant him a 100% discount for the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ). He says TfL has relied on criteria which are not listed on its website; he believes his vehicle should be eligible for the discount based on the published criteria.
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 Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
TfL’s decision is in accordance with the discount criteria set out in the Charging Order for the ULEZ. I appreciate Mr X is frustrated that TfL has refused his application based on a technical point which is not clearly set out on its website but this does not affect the validity of its decision. We cannot therefore criticise it or achieve the outcome Mr X wants, which is for TfL to grant him the discount.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault affecting TfL’s decision.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman