Summary: Mr X complains the Council will not give him a pro-rata refund for unused years on a private hire vehicle operator’s licence he took out with it. We will not investigate as it is unlikely we will find fault by the Council. Mr X’s complaint about the Council suspending his licence prior to this is outside our legal remit. This is because Mr X had the right to appeal against the Council’s decision in court.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council will not provide a pro-rata refund on the fee he paid for a private hire vehicle (PHV) operator’s licence which he could no longer use after he had to retire early. Mr X also complains about the Council suspending his licence prior to this and that this caused him to lose business. Mr X seeks compensation for his financial losses.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we will find fault or could add to any previous investigation by the Council (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint and I have sent him my draft decision for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X says he was forced to retire early in 2018 from being a chauffeur after the Council suspended his PHV operator’s licence which caused him to lose his customer base. Mr X wants compensation from the Council for lost business. Mr X also says there were four years left to run on his licence and complains the Council will not give him a refund for these years.
6. The Council advised Mr X when it suspended his licence that he had the right to appeal against its decision to the Magistrates’ Court.
7. The Council says it will not provide a refund of the license fee as Mr X does not meet the criteria required to qualify a refund in that he had not transferred his business, or part thereof, to another operator and had not before doing this, been granted a new licence.

Analysis

8. We will not investigate the Council’s suspension of Mr X’s licence as it is reasonable to expect Mr X to have challenged this by way of an appeal in the courts.
9. The Council explains why Mr X does not qualify for a refund of the licence fee. It is unlikely we can add to this or that the Council is at fault.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. My decision is we will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X had a right of appeal to the courts against the suspension of his licence. It is unlikely the Council is at fault in respect of its refusal to pay Mr X a refund of his licence fee.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman