Casework successes


Mr D maintained that during the week he travelled, the usual train had been reduced from eight carriages to four. This meant that passengers were left waiting for subsequent trains because they were unable to board the overcrowded shorter trains although these trains were generally running on time. Mr D maintained that he waited an hour at Dagenham Dock from 8:30 until 9:30 before he could finally board a train. Mr D made a delay repay claim because he could not board the train but this was declined so he wrote to London TravelWatch. London TravelWatch asked C2C to look into his allegation that the number of carriages were severely reduced during that week and caused passengers to be unable to board trains. C2C said some trains had been short formed and offered to refund the cost of a single fare in rail travel vouchers.

Virgin Trains

Mr L made a mistake with the return date on his tickets from Lincoln back to London.  He contacted Virgin Trains East Coast to cancel the return tickets but they cancelled all the tickets so he had to rebook tickets for the outward journey as well as the return journey, at a non-discounted price.  Mr L came to London TravelWatch as Virgin were not prepared to refund him for the more expensive tickets he’d had to book as a result of their error.  A couple of months after appealing the case, Mr L informed London TravelWatch that Virgin had settled in full.

TfL buses

Mr S reported a bus shelter light not working at night.  Originally, he was told that the light was working as an Asset Operations Officer tested it and it worked.  On appeal, the Asset Operations Officer returned at 4am and found the light wasn't working but when it was tested it was found to be working. On appeal, the caseworker contacted TfL and requested that the Asset Operations Officer revisit at night and with an engineer.  They found that the street lights either side of the bus shelter were so bright that the sensors in the bus stop light thought it was daylight and automatically turned the light off.  The engineer tried to adjust the sensors but the streetlights were too bright.  TfL then contacted the local authority to see if downlights could be put on the street lights but was advised that there was no intention to do this on a main road.  The passenger was informed of the situation and the case was closed.

TfL Rail

Mr D topped up his Pay As You Go Oyster card but later found that the top up had not been done.  To complicate matters he had also been given an incorrect receipt.  He wrote to TfL for a refund but after six weeks did not get a reply so he came to London TravelWatch.  TfL tried to find Mr D’s complaint but could not find it.  TfL asked the caseworker to request copies of emails Mr D had sent. It transpired that Mr D was using the wrong email address for TfL.  However, TfL still agreed to refund Mr D plus a goodwill gesture for the difficulties he incurred.


  • Ms T ordered an Apprentice Oyster photo card which never arrived.  She contacted TfL and eventually another one was sent, but in the meantime she had had to buy full price tickets.  TfL wouldn't refund the full cost of the fares as they aren't liable for lost Apprentice Oyster photocard but offered her £90. The passenger was not happy with this amount and approached London TravelWatch.  On appeal, TfL agreed that the passenger was out of pocket and increased the amount of goodwill offered.  The passenger was happy and accepted the offer.

  • Mrs S experienced a technical error which resulted in a duplicate transaction charge for a fairly large amount of money.  TfL followed the normal procedure to resolve this.  However, Mrs S felt she was entitled to compensation for the inconvenience caused to her, the delay getting a refund and poor advice from TfL.  Mrs S approached London TravelWatch who appealed on her behalf.  TfL agreed the refund had taken longer than necessary to process and that the information given to Mrs S had not been accurate.  TfL offered a good will gesture and Mrs S was satisfied with this outcome.