Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an exam for a taxi driver licence. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council used the wrong answer as part of a taxi driver exam. He says he failed the exam because the Council did not mark it correctly.

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 an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I asked the Council for information about the disputed question. I considered comments Mr X made in response to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X took a taxi driver exam. To pass, applicants have to score 100% on the compulsory section and 80% on the second section. Mr X failed the exam because he got one question on the compulsory section wrong. Mr X can re-take the exam for £42.
5. The question asked what a taxi driver should do if a young female passenger passed out drunk in the car. Mr X ticked that he would take her to a police station. The correct answer, as recorded by the Council, is that the driver should take the passenger to their destination and ask for help. Mr X does not accept that this is the correct answer. He says passengers often decline to give their home address.
6. The Council has explained that Mr X has passed a safeguarding exam which has a similar question and answer (take the passenger home). The Council also says that to take someone to a place, other than their stated destination, could be regarded as kidnap or false imprisonment.
7. The Council has discussed the question with Mr X, invited him to re-take the examination and explained that the police support the official answer.
8. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s approach. He says his fellow taxi drivers all agree with him but the Council will not change the answer.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It is for the Council, as the body that sets the exam, to decide on the answers. The fact that Mr X disagrees with the official answer is not a reflection of administrative fault. The answer is reasonable and supported by external organisations. The Council has also explained why Mr X’s preferred answer is not one which it can support and has invited him to re-take the test. Mr X has not provided any evidence that his answer is supported by official licensing bodies or safeguarding authorities.
10. The Ombudsman does not act as an appeal body. He cannot intervene simply because a council makes a decision that someone disagrees with.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman