Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Ultra Low Emission Zone because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complained the Authority has failed to recognise that his vehicle meets the requirements to be exempt for payment within the Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ). Mr Y says this is despite a make and model the same as his vehicle but a different colour being ULEZ compliant.
2. Mr Y says this has caused him significant inconvenience and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
4. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information Mr Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr Y has provided documentation including from his MOT to demonstrate his view that his vehicle is compliant for an exemption from charges for the ULEZ. The Authority has explained that the evidence provided is not sufficient for it to mark the vehicle as compliant. It has explained what the evidence would need to show for the Authority to change its compliance status.
7. We cannot question whether a council’s 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.
8. The Authority has been able to show it has considered the evidence, explain why this is not sufficient to Mr Y and what he would need to provide which would meet the required level. While Mr Y may be unhappy with the Authority’s decision, we are not an appeal body. As the decision has been made properly, based on the relevant criteria and the evidence provided, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman