Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an unsuccessful application for a disabled persons freedom pass. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, disagrees with the Council’s decision that he is ineligible for a disabled persons freedom pass. He has hearing and sight loss and a different council issued a pass five years ago.

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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes Mr X’s application and supporting evidence, and the eligibility rules for a pass. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X applied for a freedom pass. He referred to sight and hearing loss and submitted some evidence. The Council assessed the evidence and decided he does not qualify. It said there was nothing to suggest his walking is significantly impaired. It also said he had not provided a certificate of visual impairment and the audiograms did not indicate that his hearing loss is profound or severe. The Council checked its hearing and sight loss registers and found Mr X is not registered on either.
5. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. We are not an appeal body and it is not my role to re-asses the application or decide if Mr X is eligible. I can only consider if there was fault in the way the Council assessed the application and I see no suggestion of fault. The Council assessed the evidence and cross-referenced it to the freedom pass rules; this means the Council followed the correct process which is the only thing I can consider.
6. Mr X says the medical evidence shows he is severely or profoundly deaf and he says the difference in hearing loss between his ears causes problems. But, the Council considered the hearing tests and decided they do not show Mr X meets the threshold for a pass and I have not seen fault in the way the Council reached that view.
7. Mr X said a different council issued a pass which was due to expire in March. I do not know why that council issued a pass but each application is considered on its merits and a previous award is no guarantee that another pass will be issued.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman