Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Transport for London (21 018 148)

Category : Transport and highways > Parking and other penalties

Decision : Upheld

Decision date : 30 Mar 2022

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s issuing a penalty charge notice for entering an ultra-low emission zone without paying the charge. This is because Transport for London has now agreed to waive the charge and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything more.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) have failed to respond to his presentations against a penalty charge notice (PCN) he received for entering an ultra-low emissions zone (ULEZ) without paying and as such the amount payable increased.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an authority has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant. I contacted TfL about the complaint and considered its response.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X received a PCN issued by TfL because he had failed to pay the ULEZ charge online. Mr X paid the initial charge late and asked TfL to accept that payment. TfL wrote to Mr X again demanding a higher payment but did not acknowledge or respond to the representations it had received.
  2. TfL told me it intends to waive the charges due and refund the money paid.
  3. In the circumstances it is unlikely further investigation would achieve anything more for Mr X as he accepts the contravention occurred and TfL has cancelled the PCN.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because TfL has agreed to waive the PCN costs, and it is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything more for him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page