Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s removal of his vehicle from a public road to a storage facility and its refusal to refund him the fee he paid to release it. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council incorrectly decided his vehicle was abandoned and removed it to a storage facility. He has since paid a fee to release his vehicle. He wants the Council to refund him the release fee.

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 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 or continue 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))

3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils must remove vehicles from roads if they decide they are abandoned. The decision as to whether a vehicle is abandoned is for the council to decide but government guidance says this is likely if at least one of the following applies:
• It has no keeper and is untaxed.
• It is stationary for a significant amount of time.
• It is significantly damaged or unroadworthy.
• It is burnt out.
• A number plate is missing.

Where a vehicle is on a public highway, councils do not have to give notice of removal.

7. The Council assessed Mr X’s vehicle in January 2024. It found the vehicle had no number plates, had signs of damage and was listed as SORN by the DVLA. It decided the vehicle was abandoned and, eight days later, removed it to a storage facility.
8. Mr X contacted the Council the following day. He paid the storage release fee and re-claimed his vehicle. However, he complained the Council should not have classed the vehicle as abandoned and removed it. He said:
• On the day the vehicle was removed, it did have valid road tax.
• It was only without number plates because he was awaiting new ones to be made.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. In its complaint response to Mr X, the Council explained how it had decided the vehicle was abandoned. This included that it did not have valid number plates, had little signs of recent use and signs of damage. It’s decision that it was abandoned appears in line with government guidance and we cannot question this decision just because Mr X disagrees with it. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman