Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s charging policy and fees for private hire licences. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X is the chairman of a trade organisation which represents private hire operators licensed by Transport for London. He says the authority’s policy on charging licence fees is unfair and poor value for money for the operators. He wants the authority to reconsider the policy.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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)
3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Authority.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
6. The complainant now has an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I will consider their comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X disagrees with the authority’s policy on charging for private hire licences. His organisation undertook a judicial review in 2018 to challenge the legality of the policy but this was dismissed by the courts.
8. The authority rejected Mr X’s complaint and said it believed the policy to be reasonable and lawful. The Ombudsman may not question the merits of decisions which have been made in a proper manner. This means the Ombudsman will not intervene in disagreements about the merits of decisions.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman