Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s decision not to pay compensation after it wrongly took money from the complainant’s Autopay account. This is because the Authority has provided a satisfactory response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says that for three months the Authority wrongly took money from his Autopay account and will not pay compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Authority. This includes the complaint correspondence and letters about the refund. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. An Autopay account allows the Authority to take money from someone’s bank account if they incur a charge for the congestion zone or emission zone. The Authority has a dispute process for Autopay issues.
5. Mr X has an Autopay account. Between January and April the Authority took ten erroneous payments from his account. This was because the Authority’s cameras misread Mr X’s vehicle registration. This meant Mr X was charged rather than the person who had driven in the zone.
6. Mr X contacted the Authority in April to dispute the charges since January. The Authority responded a few days later. It said it had reviewed the charges and agreed they were wrong. It apologised and said it would issue a full refund. It also said it would take steps to stop the problem re-occurring. There was a further erroneous charge in early May which the Authority refunded.
7. Mr X asked for compensation which the Authority declined.
8. We will not investigate this complaint because the Authority has provided a satisfactory response. Within days of Mr X raising a query the Authority reviewed the charges, decided they were wrong, apologised, took steps to correct the error and issued a refund. It is unfortunate there was a further erroneous charge but that has also been refunded.
9. This is a satisfactory response and, while I appreciate Mr X was put to some time and trouble, I have not seen any evidence he incurred a financial loss. Further if Mr X had disputed the charges before April it is likely the problem would have been resolved earlier in the year.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because the Authority has provided a satisfactory response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman