Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the state of a bus run on behalf of Transport for London. This is because the matter does not cause Mr X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the state of a bus he travelled on in London. He is concerned Transport for London (TfL) has not taken his concerns seriously or told him what it will do to resolve the issue.

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 Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

4. 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.
5. I understand Mr X is unhappy about the state of the bus but TfL confirms it has passed Mr X’s feedback to the bus operator and it is unlikely we would recommend any further action as the issue does not cause Mr X significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman