Summary: Mr X complained Transport for London delayed sending him an extended license for his private hire vehicle. Transport for London was at fault for failing to consider how postal delays would affect whether Mr X would receive the license on time. Transport for London has agreed to apologise to Mr X for the frustration this caused him and remind its staff they should respond to complaints according to its policy.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained Transport for London delayed sending him an extended license for his private hire vehicle. Mr X says this meant he could not work for nine days.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with the actions or proposed actions of an organisation in our jurisdiction, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered:
• all the information Mr X provided and discussed the complaint with him;
• Transport for London’s comments about the complaint and the supporting documents it provided; and
• Transport for London’s policies and the Ombudsman's guidance on remedies.
5. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

6. Private hire vehicles (PHV’s) must have car licenses, which have to be renewed annually. It is illegal for divers to use their PHV without a valid car license.
7. In late March 2020, Transport for London (TfL) issued a notice which said it had closed its vehicle inspection centres due to the COVID-19 pandemic. It issued updated guidance a week later. It said licenses that were due to expire between 23 March and 30 June 2020 would be extended for a further six months from the date of their expiry.
8. TfL’s complaints policy says it will respond in ten working days. If more time is needed, it will tell the complainant what is happening with the complaint, how long a response will take and who is dealing with it.

What happened

9. Mr X drives a private hire vehicle (PHV). His license was due for renewal in early May 2020.
10. In mid-May, Mr X contacted TfL to say he had not yet received his extended license and was unable to work. He asked it to send an email copy. TfL responded the same day to say it had sent the license three days before Mr X’s license was due to expire. It said, ‘due to delays in postage we would advise you to allow maximum of 14 days from the date of postage to reach you’. It said it could not send him an email copy because licenses must be sent in the post.
11. Mr X received the extended license nine days after the original expired. He was unable to work for those nine days and says this meant he lost £1350 in earnings.
12. Mr X complained to TfL at the end of May and again three months later because he had not had a response.
13. TfL responded in late January 2021. It said there were no significant delays in sending his license, but ‘we know at the time Royal Mail was delayed making deliveries’.
14. In its response to our enquiries, TfL said:
• it issued extensions automatically;
• it used 2nd class post as standard;
• it could not send Mr X an email copy as the paper versions had security features to prevent counterfeiting and fraud;
• it was not aware of any specific delays affecting post delivery at the time; and
• it issued extended licenses as quickly as possible and in expiry date order. It had a large number of extensions to process.

Findings

License delay

15. TfL used an automated system to issue the extensions. It says it was sending them as quickly as possible and in expiry order. It would not send email versions of the licenses to prevent criminal activity. There was no fault in its process.
16. However, TfL’s response to Mr X in May 2020 suggests it was aware there were delays in Royal Mail delivery times. It confirmed this in its complaint response in January 2021. I consider TfL was at fault for failing to consider whether, given the delays, it was appropriate to use 2nd class post to send Mr X’s license.
17. I cannot say whether, without that fault, Mr X would have received his extended license before the standard license expired. Therefore, the injustice to Mr X is uncertainty. In the circumstances, I consider an apology is sufficient and it is not appropriate to recommend that TfL makes a payment to Mr X for lost earnings.

Complaint handling

18. TfL’s complaint policy says it will respond in ten working days. It took almost eight months. It did not update Mr X or explain the reason for the delay. This was fault. The Ombudsman recognises the COVID-19 pandemic had a serous impact on the ability of many organisations to function at normal levels. However, we expect bodies to have continued to make efforts to respond to complaints in a timely way. TfL’s delay was significant and its failure to update Mr X added to his frustration.

Back to top

Agreed action

19. Within one month of the date of my final decision, TfL will apologise to Mr X for the faults identified in this decision.
20. Within three months of the date of my final decision, TfL will remind its staff they should respond to complaints according to its policy.

Back to top

Final decision

21. I have completed my investigation. I have found fault leading to personal injustice. I have recommended action to remedy that injustice and prevent recurrence of the fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman