Summary: We will not investigate Mx X’s complaint that they had to pay a £2.50 congestion charge surcharge as a result of issues with Transport for London’s website. This is because the injustice Mx X claims is not significant.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mx X, complains that as a result of issues with Transport for London’s website they could not pay the congestion charge on the day of their travel into the congestion charge zone. As a result they had to pay the following day which incurred an additional charge of £2.50.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
5. Although Mx X has had to pay an additional £2.50 this is not a significant amount and does not warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the injustice Mx X claims is not significant enough to warrant the cost of investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman