Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the London congestion charge. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is no evidence of fault causing the complainant injustice that warrants our involvement.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained he paid the London congestion charge unnecessarily because Transport for London (TfL) could not tell him if he had entered the charging zone. This was in January 2021. He says he has had great difficulty pursuing the matter with TfL since then.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr B and our Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

4. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint. Even if it was unnecessary, the congestion charge Mr B paid was £11.50. I do not consider this or other fault by TfL can have caused him injustice that warrants our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman