The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a Clear Air Zone exemption for his vehicle. This is because there is no sign of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a Clear Air Zone (CAZ) exemption for his vehicle.
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) 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 the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X applied to the Council for a CAZ exemption for his vehicle which would enable him to drive in the Bradford Clear Air Zone without paying.
The Council refused Mr X’s application. It explained that exemptions are only available to its residents or businesses which are registered within the Council’s area. Mr X is not a Council resident. His home address is within Kirklees Council’s area.
Mr X’s application was initially refused on the basis his business was registered outside the Council’s area. Mr X said his vehicle was for private, not business, use. The Council accepted this but its decision stood. This is because he is not a resident of, or business registered in, its area. As a result, he does not meet the criteria for an exemption. This information is published on the Council’s website.
Whilst I acknowledge Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s decision there is no sign of fault by the Council. It has decided his application in line with the published eligibility criteria.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision to refuse his application for a CAZ exemption.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman