The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision that the complainant must pay to drive his taxi in the Clean Air Zone. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council charges him to drive his private hire taxi into the Clean Air Zone (CAZ) even though he has compliant vehicle. Mr X says the Council does not charge another taxi of the same vehicle make. Mr X says he is exempt from the charge.
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 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), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I used the Government’s vehicle checker website to see if Mr X’s taxi attracts a charge in CAZs. I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X drives a non-wheelchair accessible private hire taxi. He complains the Council charges him £7 to drive into the CAZ. Mr X says this is wrong because his taxi is compliant with the emission standards and other councils do not charge him to enter CAZs. Mr X complained and referred to a similar taxi which the Council does not charge to enter the zone.
The Council explained that its CAZ scheme includes taxis; this means there is a charge for non-compliant taxis to enter the CAZ. The Council explained why Mr X’s taxi does not meet the standard to enter the zone without charge. It also explained that the other taxi does meet the standard because it is wheelchair accessible. The Council explained why it has different rules for wheelchair accessible taxis. The Council said other council areas have different rules and his taxi might not attract a charge in other zones.
I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I have used the Government’s emissions vehicle checker website and this confirms that Mr X’s taxi attracts a £7 charge to enter Bradford’s CAZ; it also confirms Mr X would not be charged to enter other CAZs. Mr X’s taxi is diesel and the Council’s emission rules state that a non-wheelchair accessible diesel taxi is not compliant. The other taxi is compliant because it is registered as a Hackney Carraige and is wheelchair accessible.
I appreciate Mr X disagrees with the rules and he is correct to say he may be exempt from charges in other CAZs; but the Council has the right to set its own emission requirements and those standards have been approved by the Government. We cannot change the rules or tell the Council it must waive the fee or provide a refund. The Council’s decision correctly reflects the rules of its scheme so there is no reason to start an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman