Summary: Ms X complains about the way the Council dealt with her concerns about the driving and behaviour of a taxi driver while taking Ms X and her son to school during a two-week period. We are not investigating the complaint further as the Council has investigated Ms X’s concerns and she has moved away from the area. So, we cannot achieve anything more for Ms X.

The complaint

1. The complaint whom I shall refer to as Ms X complains about the way the Council responded to her concerns about the behaviour and driving of a taxi driver. The driver took Ms X and her son to school and then back home again during a two-week period. Ms X wants the Council to change the taxi driver or taxi company, so they are not subject to dangerous driving

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have read the papers submitted by Ms X. I considered the Council’s response to Ms X’s complaints. I have explained my draft decision to Ms X and the Council and considered the comments received.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council provides a taxi service as free home to school transport for Ms X’s son to attend school and be brought home again. Ms X accompanies her son in the taxi.
6. In February 2019 Ms X complained about the behaviour and driving of one taxi driver who drove them for two weeks. Ms X said the taxi company provided two drivers during this two-week period and she was only complaining about one of the drivers.
7. Ms X complained the driver’s behaviour was inappropriate and asked questions about her private life. Ms X says the taxi driver’s driving was dangerous due to speeding. And he ate fruit and looked at his phone while driving. Ms X says the driver was late on the first day. Ms X says the taxi driver did not wear a seatbelt and failed to check her son’s seat belt putting them in danger.
8. The Council’s Transport Delivery Team (TDT) investigated Ms X’s complaints and contacted the taxi company. The company owner disagreed with Ms X the driver was speeding. The owner said the driver was consistent with his speed and did not drive fast. The owner said the driver respectfully declined Ms X’s offer to share her food with him.
9. The owner acknowledged the driver was five minutes late on the first day partly because of the weather. But this did not make Ms X’s son late for school. The owner disagreed with Ms X’s allegation about the seatbelts and said the driver made sure all seatbelts were fastened before moving off.
10. The owner denied the driver asked about Ms X’s private life. The owner said the driver was usually quiet although happy to speak to Ms X during the journey if she had any questions. The TDT said it had recorded Ms X’s concerns and response from the taxi company. But it would not be taking more action against the taxi driver.
11. Ms X remained unhappy with the Council’s investigation saying the taxi company’s response was untrue. The Council reviewed the complaint response and explained it had been dealt with by the TDT in line with its procedures. This was because it had investigated on the day the incidents Ms X reported and then explained the outcome of the investigation to Ms X. The Council said TDT had logged the incident and taxi company’s response so any pattern of incidents could be monitored. The TDT held monthly meetings with taxi companies which included a review of any incidents reported that month. The Council said TDT raised the incident with the operator during the March 2019 meeting.
12. The Council expects all taxi firms contracted by TDT to operate a high-level care service catering for the needs of all passengers. If there is a need for action this is followed up and extra training arranged if needed. The Council explained the taxi company had been contracted by the TDT for 10 different routes over the last three years. TDT had no complaints about driver behaviour or quality of service from the company. The Council considered there was nothing to suggest the taxi company was not responding honestly about the incident.
13. The Council explained taxi companies are required to follow the Council’s Code of Conduct. This provides guidance on the procedures drivers and escorts must follow in case of accident, breakdown and emergencies. It also includes guidance for passenger with special requirements. The Code also requires operators to ensure drivers have appropriate training including safeguarding training and disability awareness training. The Council confirmed the driver complained about has completed safeguarding training and would be attending disability awareness training soon.
14. The Council considered TDT had taken the matter seriously, taken suitable action with the operator and had procedures in place to reduce the risk of future incidents.
15. The Council says Ms X has now moved areas and the home to school transport is provided by a different Council.

My assessment

16. Ms X ‘s complaints covered a two-week period in early 2019 and I have not seen any evidence of further complaints after that time. Ms X has now moved Council areas and the home to school transport is being provide by a different Council.
17. The documents I have seen show the Council responded to Ms X’s complaints about incidents with the taxi driver and explained the outcome of the investigation to her.
18. The taxi company and Ms X have a different opinion about the allegations she has made. Ms X has not provided any independent confirmation of her allegations so I do not consider it will be possible, on the balance of probabilities, to reach a robust conclusion about what occurred. In any event Ms X has achieved the outcome she was seeking with a change of taxi provider. Because of this I do not consider that I can achieve a different outcome for Ms X or achieve anything more for Ms X through further investigation. So, I am discontinuing my investigation into Ms X’s complaints.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I am discontinuing my investigation into Ms X’s complaint. The Council has investigated Ms X’s concerns and she has now moved from the area. So, I do not consider I can achieve a different outcome for Ms X or achieve anything more for her.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman