Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the operation of a bus service near the complainant’s home. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. It is unlikely investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr B, has complained about noise and vibration affecting his home. He says these are caused by buses operated by Transport for London (TfL) on a route that passes his home. He believes the buses are too large and are driven too fast.
2. Mr B says TFL should:
• bring back the single decker buses which it replaced with double decker buses;
• properly monitor the speed of buses and report speeding drivers to the police; and
• pay him compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if, for example, we believe:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the authority concerned; or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr B and TfL. I have also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because TfL has considered and responded appropriately to his concerns. Investigation would add nothing significant to what we know. TfL has explained why it needs larger buses; we could not require it to change the type of bus it uses. TfL also monitors speeds but enforcing speed limits is mainly the responsibility of the police. If Mr B believes there is a statutory nuisance or the highway is not in proper repair, he should raise this with his local borough council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman