Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s inspection of his private hire vehicle. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s inspection of his private hire vehicle. The vehicle failed the inspection. Mr X says the decision was unfair and the Council is discriminating against him.

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
• 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. In February 2021, the Council inspected a car Mr X operates as a private hire vehicle. The inspection is a statutory requirement and forms part of the vehicle licencing process. Mr X’s car failed the inspection.
6. Mr X complained to the Council and listed the parts of the inspection he was unhappy with. Mr X said the Council was discriminating against him and “the Council’s inspection staff (who are all white Caucasian males) believe the BAME community are second class citizens.”
7. During its investigation into Mr X’s complaint the Council again viewed Mr X’s vehicle. In its responses to his complaints the Council addressed each of Mr X’s concerns. The Council upheld the original inspector’s findings. In its responses to Mr X the Council referred to the relevant guidance and legislation. It explained the rationale behind each of the failures and why the Council felt they were correct. It said that it appoints inspectors based on their abilities. But it had also placed “positive action statements on licensing job adverts to encourage female and BAME applicants.” The Council said it could find no evidence Mr X’s race had been a factor in the results of the inspection. Council staff had instead “merely applied the Council’s policies and conditions when inspecting your vehicle.”
8. Our role is to look for administrative fault. We are not a right of appeal for people who disagree with a council’s decision. We can consider how a council has reached a decision. But, as I explain in paragraph 3, we cannot question the decision itself unless there is fault in the way the decision was reached.
9. It is clear Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s inspection of his vehicle. But the reasons for failure were based on the professional judgment of the inspector. The decisions have been scrutinised by the Council as part of its complaints process. The Council has provided what I consider to be proportionate and reasonable responses to Mr X’s complaint. It reassessed the vehicle and decided to uphold the findings from the original inspection. This is a decision the Council is entitled to take. I know Mr X disagrees with the findings. But that is not a reason for us to investigate. Without fault in the decision-making process, we cannot become involved. Based on the evidence available there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman