Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Transport for London’s decision to refuse his application for a grant. This is because the complaint is late and further investigation is unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X says Transport for London (TfL) refused his application to retrofit his vehicle to make it Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) compliant. He says TfL rejected his application because did not meet the ownership requirement by one month. He says he is now paying ULEZ charges, which are causing him financial difficulties, and he believes the situation has significantly reduced the value of his vehicle. He wants TfL to agree to pay for the retrofit.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something an authority has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Authority.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In January 2023, Transport for London (TfL) launched a vehicle scrappage scheme for small businesses in Greater London. The scheme offered grants to scrap or retrofit vehicles that did not meet Ultra Low Emission Zone (ULEZ) standards.
7. The scheme opened on 30 January 2023 and stopped accepting new applications on 8 September 2024. To qualify along with other set criteria, applicants had to own the vehicle for at least 12 months prior to the scheme starting.
8. In March 2023, Mr X applied for a grant to retrofit his ULEZ non-compliant vehicle. TfL rejected the application because he had not owned the vehicle for 12 months. Mr X says he owned the vehicle for 11 months at the time of applying.
9. In January 2024, Mr X complained. TfL reviewed the complaint but upheld its decision, explaining that Mr X did not meet the ownership requirement. TfL said it had clearly published the eligibility rules online and could not make exceptions for applicants who bought their vehicles less than a year before the scheme launched.
10. We normally do not investigate complaints about events more than 12 months old. In this case it has been over a year since TfL rejected Mr X’s application, it would have been reasonable for Mr X to have complained to us sooner.
11. TfL assessed Mr X’s application in line with the published rules. Mr X accepts that he did not meet the ownership requirement but wants TfL to make an exception. It would be unreasonable for TfL to make an exception for one individual.
12. We will not investigate this complaint because it is late. Even if we did investigate, TfL applied its eligibility criteria correctly, and we are unlikely to find evidence of fault in its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the complaint is late and further investigation is unlikely to find fault.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman