Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Miss X’s Freedom Pass application. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault, in the Council’s decision, to justify investigating. We will also not investigate the complaint about staff conduct, as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained that the Council rejected her Freedom Pass application and refused her appeal, saying the decision was unfair because the Council did not properly consider her medical conditions. She said the refusal caused avoidable distress.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

(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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X said the Council failed to consider her medical conditions during her application for a Freedom Pass.
6. The Council’s initial consideration of Miss X’s request and appeal correspondence demonstrates it considered Miss X’s medical conditions, but this still fell short of the level of impairment that would mean Miss X was eligible for a Freedom Pass.
7. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether the complainant disagrees with the decision the Council made.
8. I will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault. On the information available in the reports I have seen, there is evidence the Council have followed the processes and considered Miss X’s medical needs, evaluated them in line with its assessment criteria and decided she did not meet the threshold for a Freedom Pass. It explained why it had considered the medical evidence submitted, was out of date. It also considered the additional information Miss X provided as part of her appeal.
9. Miss X also complained about a Council’s staff members conduct, particularly that they were rude and refused to give their name.
10. I will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Council have already investigated and spoken with the staff member in question. Therefore, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about her Freedom Pass application because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. We will also not investigate the complaint about staff conduct, as further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman