The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Transport for London sign, which Mr X considers misleading. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
Mr X complains a sign put up by Transport for London (TfL) at a train station was misleading and meant he believed he had a valid ticket for travel when he did not. As a result he received a fine. He wants TfL to remove the sign and refund his penalty fare.
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 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
From the information provided it appears Mr X interpreted the sign to mean that he could travel on National Rail services and the London Underground by tapping his card to pay both fares. However this is not what the sign says.
The sign is also adjacent to another warning of penalty fares for not buying a valid ticket for travel on National Rail services. So Mr X was on notice about the consequences of not having a valid ticket and it was his responsibility to ensure he paid the relevant fares.
TfL cannot control how Mr X interpreted the sign and I do not find it misleading in the way Mr X claims. We are therefore unlikely to find fault by TfL or to say it must reimburse Mr X for the cost of the penalty fare.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by TfL or to say its sign caused the injustice Mr X claims.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman