Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Authority wrongly issued several ultra-low emission zone penalty charge notices to Mr X as the Authority has offered to make a payment to Mr X to remedy the injustice caused to him and I am satisfied with that action.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains Transport for London (TfL) wrongly issued him with several ultra-low emission zone (ULEZ) penalty charge notices (PCNs) when his car was compliant. Mr X says this caused him worry and inconvenience and he seeks compensation from TfL for this.

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 or continue with 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 the complainant and the Authority.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. TfL has told us that due to an error, its records were not properly updated to show that Mr X’s car was compliant with the conditions of the ULEZ scheme and that as a result, PCNs were wrongly issued. TfL has cancelled the PCNs and confirmed that its records are now correct. TfL has offered to send an apology letter to Mr X and to make a payment of £30 for the injustice caused to him.
6. We will not investigate as I am satisfied with the actions TfL proposes to take and it would not be in the public interest for us to investigate this matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because I am satisfied with the actions TfL proposes to take to remedy the injustice caused to him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman