Summary: Ms X complains the Council has not given due regard to its duty under the Equality Act to ensure her local leisure centre is autism friendly. Ms X complains this means her and other people with autism have been excluded from services. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council for how it considered its duty under the Equality Act. The Ombudsman does find fault with the Council for how it handled Ms X’s complaint. The Council has agreed to pay a financial remedy and implement a service remedy.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to ensure the new leisure centre is autism friendly.
2. Ms X complains the Council has failed to ensure that staff are trained to understand Autism, and that this means she and other autistic people are now unable to access the leisure centre.
3. Ms X complains the Council’s failure to carry out autism friendly training and adjustments means the Council has failed in its duty to the Equality Act.
4. Ms X also complains about the Council’s handling of her complaint and its failure to respond to her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
7. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

8. I considered Ms X’s complaint and information she provided. I also considered information from the Council.
9. I invited Ms X and the Council to comment on my draft decision and considered any comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Legislation and guidance

The Equality Act 2010

10. The Equality Act 2020 makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts.

What happened

11. Ms X has autism, and previously used a leisure centre owned by the Council and ran by contractors on behalf of the Council.
12. Ms X had engaged with the leisure centre with suggestions and guidance on how the leisure centre could be more autism friendly.
13. The Council built a new leisure centre. This included a new different layout to the one Ms X had previously used, as well as differences in activities and staff that would be working there.
14. When the new leisure centre opened, Miss X attended. She became concerned that the previous work and guidance she had given to the old leisure centre had been lost on the new one.
15. Ms X complained to the Council and sent a freedom of information request. In the complaint and request she set out that

• The Council was discriminating against people with autism as it had failed to make its new leisure centre autism friendly
• Staff were not suitably trained in autism
• Service users with autism could not engage with the services.

16. The Council responded to Ms X’s freedom of information request, however it failed to respond to her complaint.
17. Ms X complained to the Ombudsman. As the Council had had enough time to respond to Ms X’s complaint and had failed to do so, the Ombudsman agreed the complaint was not premature.

Analysis

Autism and Equality Act considerations

18. The Ombudsman cannot question decisions where the Council has been able to evidence proper decision making. A council is entitled to make its decisions based on the evidence available at the time.
19. Councils have a proactive duty to have mechanisms in place to ensure that people with disabilities are not disadvantaged when engaging with Council services.
20. As part of my investigation, I asked the Council how it had considered autism and other hidden disabilities in the redevelopment of the leisure centre. The Council had already provided a leaflet which gave some information, but the leaflet largely covered physical disabilities.
21. In response to my enquiries, the Council provided evidence that it had sought specialist advice from an autism charity and independent architects on it proposed plans for the leisure centre.
22. The Council explored the suggestions made about how to ensure the leisure centre was autism friendly.
23. The Council has also been able to evidence that it carried out training for staff. This consisted of compulsory online training for all staff, and in person autism training for all staff working at the leisure centre.
24. I am satisfied the Council has been proactive in meeting its duty under the Equality Act to ensure that users of the leisure centre with autism are not disadvantaged.
25. The Ombudsman cannot find fault with a Councils decision just because a complainant disagrees with it. The Ombudsman looks at whether the Council has been able to evidence reasonable decision making. I am satisfied the Council has been able to show it considered the evidence available in its decisions about the leisure centre.
26. I am satisfied the Council has been proactive in arrange suitable training for staff to ensure it is meeting its duties under the Equality Act.
27. Complaint handling
28. In response to my enquiries, the Council accepted that it responded to Ms X’s Freedom of Information request, which Ms X made at the same time as her complaint. However, it had not responded to her complaint.
29. This was fault by the Council, causing Ms X injustice as she had to bring her complaint to the Ombudsman. The Council should have followed its complaints policy and provided Ms X’s with an update or a response to her complain. This would have meant the complaint would have been considered and responded to and Ms X’s concerns could have been addressed in a timely manner.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. Within 4 weeks of the final decision, the Council has agreed to

• Write to Ms X and apologise for not responding to her complaint.
• Pay Ms X £100 for the time and trouble taken because of the Council’s maladministration.

31. Within 8 weeks of the final decision the Council has agreed to

• Review how it ensures complaints that are submitted with FOI requests are considered and responded to under the complaint’s procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

32. I have completed my investigation. I find fault with the Council for how it handled Ms X’s complaint. I do not find fault with the Council for how it considered its duties under the Equality Act in regards to ensuring the leisure centre was autism friendly.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman