Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the authority will not pay Mr X for his scrapped vehicle under its ultra-low emission zone scrappage scheme as it is unlikely we will find fault by the authority.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) has refused to make a £2000 payment to him after he scrapped his vehicle. Mr X acknowledges that he did not follow due process but believes the Council should still honour the payment.

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. I have checked information on TfL’s website about the scrappage scheme.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. TfL’s scrappage scheme was a grant program which provided funds for eligible applicants to scrap their older, polluting vehicles and purchase vehicles compliant with TfL’s low emission zones.
7. Mr X scrapped his vehicle after he checked if it was eligible for the scheme on TfL’s website. Mr X now acknowledges that he did not follow the correct process to apply for the scrappage scheme but feels TfL should still honour the payment.
8. TfL has advised Mr X that the online checker only confirmed whether a vehicle may or may not have been eligible under the scheme and that there was an application procedure to be followed after this initial check. TfL told Mr X that as he scrapped his vehicle before making an application, payment could not be made.
9. I recognise that Mr X is unhappy about TfL’s decision, but his complaint does not provide evidence of fault in the way it was made and we cannot therefore question it. In coming to this view, I have checked information that was available on TfL’s website when the scheme was live and this clearly describes the application process that needed to be followed before scrappage was authorised.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault by TfL.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman