Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about charges for driving in the clean air zone and exemptions. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says the Council did not provide clear information about the clean air zone (CAZ) and exemptions. He has incurred charges of nearly £600 due to a lack of information. Mr X wants a refund and an exemption.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the correspondence about Mr X’s application for an exemption. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council operates a CAZ. Vehicles which do not meet the emission standard must pay a charge to drive in the zone. The Council’s website says passenger cars will not be charged. The website also says that non-compliant light goods vehicles will be charged regardless of whether the use is private or for business. The website includes a link to a government website which shows whether a vehicle is chargeable.
5. Some people are eligible for an exemption from the charge. The website states there are no exemptions for vehicles bought after September 2022.
6. In 2025 Mr X bought a vehicle. The DVLA classified the vehicle as a light goods vehicle. Mr X thought the vehicle would be exempt from the charge because it is for personal use. However, he has incurred charges of nearly £600.
7. Mr X applied for an exemption. The Council refused the exemption because he bought the vehicle after 2022.
8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. I have checked the government website which confirms Mr X’s vehicle is chargeable within the CAZ. It is also correct that the DVLA has classified the vehicle as a light goods vehicle. Mr X may disagree, but this designation has been made by the DVLA, not the Council.
9. I have checked the Council’s website which explains light goods vehicles attract a charge. I appreciate Mr X may have thought his vehicle would be classified as a passenger car, but this misunderstanding is not due to fault by the Council. There is information on the website to allow Mr X to check the status of any vehicle he was thinking of buying or had bought. The website also explains the Council does not issue exemptions for any vehicle bought after 2022.
10. There is no reason to start an investigation because there is nothing to suggest the Council has incorrectly imposed the charges or refused an exemption, and the information is explained on the website.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman