Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's concessionary travel pass renewal arrangements and its refusal to provide a renewal reminder as a reasonable adjustment. We cannot determine whether the Council has breached the Equality Act or discriminated against Mr X, as those matters can only be decided by the courts. The Council has already considered the issues raised through its complaints process and identified service improvements. Further investigation is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council operates a two-tier concessionary travel pass renewal system. He says some disabled pass holders receive automatic renewals while others, including people with physical mobility impairments, must renew manually without reminders. He says the Council refused his request for a renewal reminder as a reasonable adjustment and failed to properly consider its duties under the Equality Act. Mr X also complains about delays in the Council's complaint handling.

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 impact 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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We will not usually investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34B(8))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says the Council's renewal arrangements are discriminatory and that its refusal to provide a renewal reminder amounts to a failure to make a reasonable adjustment. He also says the Council failed to comply with its Public Sector Equality Duty.
7. The Ombudsman cannot determine whether the Council's policy is discriminatory or whether it has breached the Equality Act. Those matters can only be decided by the courts. Our role is limited to considering whether the Council properly took account of its duties under the Equality Act when making decisions affecting Mr X.
8. The Council considered Mr X's concerns through its complaints process and issued a further review response. It accepted shortcomings in its stage one response, including that it did not properly distinguish between automatic renewal and renewal reminders. Also, that it did not sufficiently address Mr X's concerns about the impact of the renewal arrangements and did not clearly explain the rationale for the different renewal routes. The Council partly upheld the complaint and accepted the issues raised warranted further consideration.
9. The Council also identified service improvements. These included reviewing renewal communications, considering whether a reminder process could be introduced for residents who must renew manually, considering equality impacts as part of that review, and improving the quality of complaint responses.
10. Given the action already taken by the Council, we are unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome by further investigation. The Council has considered the concerns raised, partly upheld the complaint, and agreed to review the matters identified. While Mr X seeks findings that the Council has acted unlawfully or discriminatorily and changes to Council policy, those are not outcomes the Ombudsman can achieve. Further investigation is therefore unlikely to lead to a different result.
11. Mr X also complains about the Council's complaint handling. We do not normally investigate complaint handling as a standalone issue where we are not investigating the substantive complaint. This is because any injustice arising from complaint handling alone is not usually significant enough to justify a separate investigation. In this case, there is insufficient additional injustice arising from the Council's complaint handling to warrant a separate investigation. Therefore, it would not be a good use of public resources to investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint. We cannot determine whether the Council has discriminated against Mr X or breached the Equality Act, as those matters can only be decided by the courts. The Council has already considered the issues raised, partly upheld the complaint, and identified service improvements. We are therefore unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome by investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman