Birmingham City Council (19 005 599)

Category : Environment and regulation > Licensing

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 19 Sep 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about taxi drivers 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 has failed to follow the correct procedures. He has also made complaints about taxi drivers.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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

  1. I read the complaint and the Council’s response. I considered some of the complaints and information Mr X sent to the Council. I spoke to Mr X and considered comments he made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr X made many complaints to the Council about taxi drivers. For example, he complained that the drivers are intrusive and talk to him. He says the firms falsify the identity of drivers and do not give him receipts or journey logs. In response the Council explained he could make a request to the firms for receipts or journey logs. It said he could inform the firms, when he makes a booking, that he would prefer it if the drivers did not speak to him.
  2. Mr X had also reported that he thought some of the drivers were carrying guns. The Council told him to immediately report any such concerns to the police. The Council also explained that his bills had been higher on those occasions when he had asked drivers to wait while he went into shops. The Council said he had made rather general complaints and it could not provide a more detailed response.
  3. Mr X sent many emails to the Council. These included:
  • screen shots of texts saying his taxi had arrived;
  • drawings which may depict Jesus;
  • a cartoon/drawing;
  • images from characters from sit-coms and films;
  • photographs of unknown men.
  1. The Council did not specifically comment on the emails described in paragraph eight.

Assessment

  1. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council licenses taxi drivers but it is not responsible for every aspect of driver behaviour. The Council has responded to Mr X’s concerns and given appropriate advice. It did not comment on every email that Mr X sent but, given the generalised nature of some of these emails, there was nothing in them that required a response.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. 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

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings