Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s inspection of the complainants taxi vehicle. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mr C, complains that the Council failed an inspection of his taxi vehicle and refused to carry out a reinspection. Mr C also complains about how the Council dealt with his complaint about these matters.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr C’s complaint and the response from the Council. I also considered information the Council provided in relation to Mr C’s complaint. I have sent a draft version of this decision to Mr C and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

Taxi vehicle inspections

5. The Council operates a policy where taxi licence holders, whose vehicles are older than seven years, must arrange for their vehicles to be inspected to ensure they are in a suitable condition, safe, comfortable and that their comply with licensing conditions.
6. Whilst inspections can be retaken if vehicles fail, it is it is the licence holders responsibility to ensure that the whole process (including any retaken inspections) is completed before the taxi licence expiry date. Applications for inspections can be made 12 weeks before the licence expiry date.

What happened

7. Six weeks before the expiry date of his licence, Mr C applied for a taxi vehicle inspection. He subsequently had to leave the country to attend a funeral of a close relative. Upon his return Mr C had to self-isolate, due to restrictions relating to the COVID 19 pandemic. During his period of self-isolation Mr C’s taxi licence expired.
8. When Mr C’s self-isolation period ended, he took his vehicle to be inspected. Inspectors carried out a visual inspection of the vehicle and recorded that they had found twenty defects, each of which meant the vehicle failed the inspection. The inspector therefore concluded that the vehicle had failed the inspection and immediately prohibited its use as a taxi. The Council wrote to Mr C to inform him of the outcome of the inspection.
9. In his complaint Mr C expressed his dissatisfaction with the inspection and asked the Council to exercise discretion and allow his vehicle to be reinspected.
10. The Council acknowledged the difficulties Mr C had recently faced. However, it refused his request for a reinspection, stating that the serious concerns about the condition of his vehicle outweighed any discretion the inspectors had to carry out a further inspection.

Assessment

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. This is because the conditions of Mr C’s taxi licence make it clear that he is responsible for maintaining his vehicle in a suitable condition, and that he is also responsible for arranging an inspection prior to the expiry date of his licence.
12. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council carried out its inspection. The inspector carried out a visual inspection and listed the problems found on the vehicle. The Council subsequently wrote to Mr C to explain why the vehicle had failed the inspection. Whilst Mr C disagrees with its decision, this does not mean the Council has done anything wrong.
13. The Council did exercise discretion when carrying out the inspection, even though Mr C’s licence had expired. When it refused his request for a further inspection, the Council acknowledged the difficult circumstances he faced, but fully explained why it did not consider it appropriate to exercise discretion again.
14. I also note that Mr C could have applied for an inspection six weeks sooner than he did, which may have given him the time to arrange for repairs to be carried out to his vehicle and to be reinspected before his licence expired.
15. Finally, Mr C complained about how the Council dealt with his complaint about these matters. However, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue which here is the inspection. Consequently, we will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr C’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman