Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that Transport for London suspended his private hire vehicle licence for one year causing loss of earnings. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because Mr X had or has legal remedies in court.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains, on behalf of Mr X, that Transport for London suspended Mr X’s private hire vehicle licence without telling him and took one year to deal with an uncorroborated allegation by a passenger. Mr Y says he was not given the opportunity to defend himself. Mr X says he was not able to work for one year and wants compensation for loss of earnings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. We cannot investigate action taken by any policing body in connection with the investigation or prevention of crime. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 2, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered Mr Y’s information and comments and his reply to my draft decision statement. The information held includes communications in December 2019 between Mr Y and Transport for London. I have considered our previous decisions on this complaint which was closed, 22 August 2018, as premature to this office (18008109). On 28 May 2019 this complaint by Mr Y was closed as premature.

Back to top

What I found

6. The law provides a licence holder with the right to appeal to the Magistrates Court when a licence is suspended or revoked. An appeal must be made within 21 days of notification of the suspension. Mr Y says Mr X and his solicitor had difficulty getting information from Transport for London.
7. Early in 2018 Transport for London suspended Mr X’s licence following an allegation of a crime by one of Mr X’s passengers. Mr X knew about this by 24 May 2018. There is reference to a police investigation.
8. On 22 August 2018 Mr X’s solicitor’s wrote to Transport for London and complained. They requested information about the progress of the investigations into the allegation which they had earlier suggested was ‘malicious’. The solicitor also refers to Transport for London objecting to an application to court for permission to make an out of time challenge to the suspension.
9. In Spring 2019 Transport for London reviewed the licence and reinstated it with a written warning.
10. Mr Y says he complained to Transport for London in May 2019 and it failed to reply to his complaint.

Analysis

11. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons:
1. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because Mr X had a right of appeal to the Magistrates Court against the suspension of his licence (see paragraph 2 and 5 above). I consider it reasonable for Mr X to have used his right of appeal. The Court could consider the case and change the decision.
2. Mr X’s solicitor made an out of time application to court. The Ombudsman cannot consider the question of why an appeal was not made on time because there have been court proceedings on the matter (see paragraph 3). There are further legal remedies against decisions by lower courts.
3. I understand the case may have taken a long time to resolve in part due to a police investigation. We cannot investigate how the police investigated an alleged crime (see paragraph 4).
4. Mr X has a legal remedy if he wants to claim loss of earnings from Transport for London due to negligence or some other wrong. Such a claim is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction (paragraph 2). I consider it reasonable for Mr X to use his legal remedy if he wants compensation for loss of earnings because a court has the power to remedy such an injustice.
5. Having regard to this complaint and the reasons why it is outside jurisdiction, the Ombudsman is not likely to achieve the outcome sought by Mr X. I also note that Mr X had legal representation in 2018. The Ombudsman will not normally investigate complaint handling when the substantive matters are outside jurisdiction and will not do so here.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that Transport for London suspended his private hire vehicle licence for one year causing loss of earnings. The complaint is outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because Mr X had or has legal remedies in court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman