Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a penalty charge notice issued by Transport for London. This is because Transport for London has agreed to cancel the penalty charge notice and refund Mrs X’s payment and this provides a suitable remedy for the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about a penalty charge notice (PCN) issued by Transport for London (TfL) for stopping in a yellow box junction. She disputes the contravention and says she had to stop to avoid a collision. She made representations against the PCN but says she did not receive a response.

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 do not start an investigation if we decide 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 Mrs X and TfL.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. As part of my assessment I contacted TfL for further information to help me to help me decide whether we can and should investigate Mrs X’s complaint.
6. In response to my enquiries TfL identified that it had not directed Mrs X to the process for challenging its escalation of the case at court when she complained she had not received its response to her representations. It therefore offered to cancel the PCN and refund Mrs X’s £240 payment.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because TfL’s actions provide a suitable remedy for the complaint and it is therefore unlikely further investigation would achieve significantly more for Mrs X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman