LGO Individual Decisions

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s decision not to refund £14.90 to the complainant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Authority’s actions related to three penalty charge notices and the actions of the Authority’s enforcement officers. We could not add to the Authority’s response and further investigation would be unlikely to lead to a different outcome.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about private hire vehicle licensing because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr Y is seeking and it is reasonable for Mr Y to use his right of appeal to go to court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to use his right of appeal to London Tribunals.

Summary: Mr X complained that Transport for London (TfL) has delayed processing his Private Hire Vehicle (PHV) Driver’s Licence application. I have found TfL at fault for a two-month delay once Mr X’s application was completed. This has caused Mr X distress. I have recommended TfL apologises to Mr X and makes a financial remedy.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about data protection because there is another body better placed to consider the complaint and it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to approach the Information Commissioners Office.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s handling of ultra-low emission zone penalty charge notices as it is unlikely we will find fault.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of a penalty charge notice as the complainant had the right to ask the court to look at her case.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s issue and handling of three penalty charge notices for contraventions of the ultra-low emission zone scheme. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about travel disruption claims because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s issue and pursuit of payment for penalty charge notices issued for contraventions of its ‘low emission zone’ scheme. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal against any penalty charge notices which it would have been reasonable for him to use. He has also started court action against Transport for London in relation to the issue.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice. This is because Transport for London has agreed to refund Mr X £270 and it is unlikely investigation would achieve anything more for him.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a highways accident because the courts are better placed to consider the complaint, and it is reasonable to expect Miss Y to approach the court.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Transport for London’s handling of Mr X’s correspondence about a penalty charge notice. This is because it would have been reasonable for Mr X to appeal to London Tribunals. Any injustice resulting from Transport for London’s delay is also not significant enough to warrant investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that he was unable to pay a penalty charge using the methods set out in the notice. This is because Transport for London has agreed to accept a lesser amount and Mr X has now paid. The case is therefore closed and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for Mr X.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about public transport because the courts and insurers are better placed to consider the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice for a moving traffic contravention as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to appeal it to London Tribunals.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about public transport because we are satisfied with the actions the Authority has already taken.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that Transport for London failed to respond to his representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about Transport for London’s handling of his representations against a penalty charge notice. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Penalty Charge Notices because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and it is not a good use of public funds to investigate how a Council dealt with a complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the enforcement of penalty charge notices which were sent to the complainant’s commercial premises for a person and vehicle he did not know. The Authority has taken satisfactory action to address the complaint.

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how Transport for London dealt with his application to renew his private hire driver’s licence. This is because we could not say that the issues raised have caused Mr X an injustice.

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s decision to reject the complainant’s application for a grant under the Scrappage Scheme. This is because the Authority has decided to award the grant and will explore if an additional remedy is needed.

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that Transport for London lost a payment she made towards a penalty charge notice. This is because Transport for London has now agreed to write off the outstanding penalty charge balance, which is more than the payment Miss X says was lost, and it is unlikely we could achieve anything more for her.