Summary: Mr X complained the Council took too long to decide whether to re-instate his taxi licence after allegations were made against him. There was some fault by the Council. This was not the main cause of the delay in the decision. The Council should apologise and take some action to address the situation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council took too long to investigate complaints against him, during which time his taxi licence remained suspended. He complains he was prevented from working as a taxi driver during the period the Council delayed reaching its decision.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone can appeal to a tribunal. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to appeal. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(a), as amended)
4. We may investigate matters coming to our attention during an investigation, if we consider that a member of the public who has not complained may have suffered an injustice as a result. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26D and 34E, as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Mr X’s representative and considered the comments he provided. I asked the Council for information and considered its response to the complaint.
7. I considered the Council’s policies and its responsibilities as the Licensing Authority.
8. I sent my draft decision to Mr X’s representative and the Council to enable them both to comment before I took a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. Mr X is a private hire driver. In July 2017 a female taxi passenger accused him of sexually assaulting her.
10. In October 2017 the Police told the Council about the accusation. The Police explained they were investigating.
11. Due to the seriousness of the allegation the Council suspended Mr X’s taxi licence on 14 October. The Council wrote to Mr X informing him of this. The letter explained Mr X had a right to appeal against this decision.
12. In December 2017 the Police re-opened an investigation about a similar allegation against Mr X from 2016.
13. On 14 July 2018 the Police told the Council they would be taking no further action.
14. On 16 July the Council sent a formal request to the Police for the disclosure of evidence and details of the Police investigation. The Council requested the information in its capacity as the Taxi and Private Hire Licensing Authority. They needed it to determine whether Mr X was a fit and proper person to continue to hold a Taxi and Private Hire Licence.
15. The Council stated it sent a second formal request on 12 November 2018. It then chased up on 10 January 2019, 13 April 2019 and 24 July 2019. At the time of our investigation, the Council still had not received the information it needed to reach a decision about Mr X’s licence. It stated it did not consider it could obtain the information from any source other than the Police.
16. The Council told us officers review suspended licences every six weeks. However, the Council does not keep records of reviews carried out.
17. The Council says it impressed upon the Police the need for timely responses to its disclosure requests. The Police told the Council they had recently recruited staff and hoped to be able to respond more quickly in future.
18. Mr X’s Representative felt that because the Police had taken no further action against him, there was no basis for the Council’s own investigations. He stated the Council had taken too long to consider the matter and Mr X’s licence should be re-instated. During his complaint, Mr X complained that the Council was not responding to emails he sent.
19. The Council responded to Mr X’s complaint in March 2019. It apologised that some of Mr X’s emails had not been acknowledged. The Council explained the Police had not responded to its requests for information about the allegations about Mr X. Until it received this it could not decide whether Mr X could have a Taxi Licence. It explained the Police had a lack of resource, but the Council had asked the Police to prioritise its request.
20. The Council told me there were 14 other outstanding suspended licences where it had made disclosure requests to the same Police force. The oldest request had been outstanding for nearly a year and the average time the Council had been waiting for a response was over 4 months.

The law and relevant council processes

21. The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act gives Licensing Authorities the power to suspend licenses. The Act also provides rights of appeal against suspensions.
22. The Local Government (Miscellaneous Provisions) Act also requires councils to ensure that it only grants a taxi or private hire licence to someone who is a ‘fit and proper person’. The Council explained that if it suspends a licence, it does so for public safety reasons.

Analysis

23. Mr X had a right of appeal against the Council’s decision to suspend his licence. He could have used his right to challenge it, by appeal, if he wished to. As a result, we cannot investigate the Council’s decision to suspend Mr X’s licence.
24. Mr X’s complaint concerns the time the Council has taken to investigate concerns while his licence is suspended.
25. When the Police decided to take no further action in July 2018, the Council began its own investigations to consider whether it should lift the suspension on Mr X’s licence or not. The Council has a duty to the public to ensure that licence holders are ‘fit and proper’. So, its action was appropriate and something the Council is entitled to do. Investigating to make this decision does not represent fault by the Council.
26. Regrettably, the Council has been unable to reach a decision in Mr X’s case for a significant period of time. The Council explained that due to resourcing issues the Police have been unable to respond to its request. The issue of police resource is the key reason for this.
27. I accept the Council’s view that it cannot reach a decision without the information it requested from the Police. However, I found there was some fault by the Council. I say this for two reasons;
• There was too little action by the Council to follow up and chase for a response. The Councils sent its first request for information in July 2018 but nothing further was done for over four months, until November 2018. The request made in November was chased at 3 times. On average, every 12 weeks.
• The Council says it reviews the situation with suspended licences every six weeks. It says it makes no record of reviews, so there is no evidence of this. It seems likely to me that reviews did not take place here. Had the reviews taken place, I would have expected the Council to have chased the outstanding information sooner. In any event, I found the Council did not chase up the information request with the Police sufficiently often.
28. The Council has 14 outstanding information requests and it has been waiting for the information on some of these for a significant period of time. As a result, I have exercised discretion to consider injustice to other people when making my recommendations.

Injustice to Mr X

29. I recognise that Mr X has been unable to work as private hire driver while his licence has been suspended. However, the root cause of the delay has not been due to fault by the Council. Rather, it has been caused by a lack of Police resource.
30. The Council made its initial request to the Police promptly. Although the Council could have chased it more regularly, I do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant injustice as a result of the Council’s actions. I say this because it does not seem likely that chasing more often would have significantly changed this situation. The Council has a number of outstanding requests in respect of Mr X’s licence and others but it is the Police resource issue that has caused the delay.
31. Unfortunately, the Council considers the information is necessary to properly decide the ‘fit and proper person’ test required by the law. Although the delay overall has been significant, the Ombudsman cannot direct a Local Authority to reach a decision without the information it deems appropriate. It should also be noted that the Ombudsman has no jurisdiction over the Police.
32. At this stage, we do not know if Mr X’s licence will be re-instated. If it is not re‑instated, Mr X would not have lost out significantly by the delay in the decision. If Mr X’s licence is re-instated it would be open to Mr X to make a fresh complaint to the Ombudsman if he considers he has suffered further injustice that has not been remedied in this investigation.
33. I note the Council has discussed the delays with the Police. The Police have stated they are addressing the resource issue. However, given the overall time that Mr X’s licence and other licences have been suspended, the situation should be escalated.

Agreed action

34. The Council should apologise to Mr X for not having chased the Police for information more regularly.
35. Given the overall time that Mr X’s licence and other licences have been suspended, the Council should ensure a senior council officer escalates the matter by addressing it with senior staff at the Police. This should include a review of all the instances of outstanding information for suspended licences. The Council should request urgent action on the longest outstanding cases. This contact should take place, at the latest, within two weeks of my final decision.
36. When it receives the information it needs on licence applications, the Council should prioritise the oldest cases and reach decisions as soon as practicably possible.
37. The Council should ensure that in future reviews of suspended licences take place every six weeks in accordance with the Council’s policy. It should ensure it chases outstanding information and escalates significant delays appropriately.

Back to top

Final decision

38. The root cause of the delay was outside the Council’s control. However, there was some fault by the Council. I have completed my investigation and closed my file on the basis the Council takes the agreed actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman