Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s decision to refuse the complainant’s application for a resident’s discount for the congestion charge. This is because there is no evidence of fault affecting the decision.

The complaint

1.  
2. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr Y, complains Transport for London (TfL) refused his application for a residents’ discount for the congestion charge.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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, for example, we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. We do not provide an appeal against TfL’s decisions. We cannot question whether a decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached that is likely to have affected the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr Y. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. As part of a funding agreement with the Government, TfL agreed to bring in temporary changes to the way the congestion charge operates. One of these changes was that from 1 August 2020, residents could no longer apply for a 90% congestion charge discount.
7. Mr Y had a resident’s discount for the congestion charge but says he did not receive the renewal form which TfL sent by email rather than by post. The discount expired and TfL regarded his application for a discount as a new request and refused it.
8. TfL had to suspend the discount in line with its funding agreement with the Government. Its decision to refuse Mr Y’s application is consistent with the temporary changes made to the congestion charge scheme. TfL considered Mr Y’s personal circumstances and we cannot question the merits of its decision not to regard them as exceptional.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is no evidence of fault by TfL.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman