Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that a taxi operator was late in arranging the complainant be picked up from an airport. This is because the taxi operator is not in our jurisdiction. It is unlikely we would find fault in the way Transport for London considered the complaint and nor have its actions caused the complainant an injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains that a taxi he booked for a pick up from an airport was an hour late. He says that Transport for London (TfL) failed to properly address his concerns about the delay. He would like a refund of the taxi fare and to be compensated for the delay.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X booked a taxi to pick him up from an airport 30 minutes after he landed but he says the taxi was an hour late. The taxi operator says the delay was due to incorrect information online about the arrival time of Mr X’s flight. TfL considered Mr X’s complaint and contacted the operator. The operator said it would not refund Mr X’s £77 fare but would offer him a £15 credit note. TfL said it was satisfied with the operator’s response.
6. The injustice he describes stems from the actions of the taxi operator and not TfL. The taxi operator is not a body that falls under our jurisdiction and therefore we cannot investigate this matter further or force it to refund his fare.
7. TfL has investigated the matters raised by Mr X in its role as licensing authority. It considered Mr X’s complaint and comments made by the taxi operator. It is unlikely we would find fault in the way in how it considered there matters. Furthermore how TfL considered the issue does not directly affect Mr X and therefore does not cause him a significant injustice.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot investigate the actions of a taxi operator and there is insufficient evidence of fault by TfL causing Mr X a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman