LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Upheld

Transport for London

22-002-519 · Transport And Highways › Public Transport · Decision date: 20 June 2022 · View Transport for London scorecard

Full Decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a travel refund because the Authority has provided a fair remedy.

The complaint

The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Authority refused to give him a refund even though his train journey was delayed and then suspended. Mr X wants an apology and refund.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates 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 the Authority offers a fair remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Mr X and the Authority. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

My assessment

Mr X complained the Authority had refused to give him a refund even though his journey was delayed and the service suspended.

In response to my enquiries the Authority said its initial response to Mr X was wrong. It has now written to Mr X to explain there was a points failure which caused a delay. The Authority refunded the £5.20 fare and paid £25 in compensation. It apologised for wrongly refusing Mr X’s refund request and said feedback will be given to the advisers who dealt with his request.

Final decision

We will not investigate this complaint because the Authority has provided a fair response by providing an apology, refund and compensation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman