The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about Transport for London’s failure to refund a £45 payment she made in error. This is because the injustice Mrs X claims is not significant enough to warrant the cost of an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, Mrs X, complains Transport for London (TfL) has failed to refund her £45 which she paid in error for her son to enter the congestion charge zone.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and TfL.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
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.
I understand Mrs X would like the refund of her £45 but the payment was not the result of any fault by TfL and the injustice Mrs X claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
TfL has invited Mrs X to provide further information to locate her payment and Mrs X is free to pursue the matter with it or her bank or card provider.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the injustice Mrs X claims is not significant enough to warrant investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman