Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a penalty charge for fare evasion on the London transport network. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault, and if Ms X disputes the offence, it is reasonable for her to put forward an argument in court in defence of any prosecution.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms X, complains Transport for London (TfL) has charged her with fare evasion. Ms X accepts she did not have enough credit on her Oyster Card for the journey. But she says she did correctly use her Oyster Card when she entered the station. There is a dispute about what happened and Ms X has been fined £225 plus £3.60 for the journey.

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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Ms X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Ms X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms X has been charged with travelling without a valid ticket. She has been given the opportunity to plead guilty and pay the fine – this means she will not need to attend court. She can also attend court and plead guilty. But if Ms X disputes the offence she is charged with, she can plead not guilty and refuse to pay the fine. She can then present an argument at court in defence of any prosecution.
6. The Ombudsman cannot interpret the law or decide Ms X’s liability for the offence TfL says she has committed. We can consider only whether TfL was at fault for issuing the fine. I have not seen any evidence of this. Ms X says she should not have been issued with the fine and this is something she can argue in court. An investigation by the Ombudsman is not therefore appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by Transport for London. If Ms X disputes the offence, it is reasonable for her to put forward her argument in court in defence of any prosecution.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman