Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a Freedom Pass. This is because the Authority has offered a fair response and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome the complainant wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says he has suffered a financial loss because the Authority delayed telling him he would not qualify for a Freedom Pass if he left London. Mr X wants a pass and compensation.

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 an investigation if we believe:

• the Authority has provided a fair response, 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and email exchanges between Mr X and the Authority. I considered the Freedom Pass rules. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Freedom Pass

4. A Freedom Pass provides free travel in London for older people who live in one of the London boroughs. The terms and conditions state that the pass is only available for people who live in London. The terms also state that if people move out of London they are no longer eligible for a pass.

What happened

5. Mr X applied for a Freedom Pass in 2015. His pass was due to expire in March 2020. When Mr X applied for the pass he was living in a London borough and the first part of his postcode was EN5.
6. Mr X contacted the Authority in November 2019. He said he was planning to move from EN5 to EN6 (he provided the full postcode). He said he would confirm the address after the move. The Authority replied and said he would need to provide evidence of his new address.
7. Mr X contacted the Authority in late January. He said he had exchanged contracts on 28 January and would be moving to his new home on 7 February. He said he would register for council tax with his new council and would send proof of his new address when available. This email contained information that his new home is not in a London borough.
8. On 7 March the Authority told Mr X he was no longer eligible for a pass because he had moved out of London.
9. Mr X complained. He said the Authority should have told him in November he would not be eligible. He said he would not have left London if he had known. Mr X said he would not have read the terms and conditions for the pass. He asked for a pass and compensation. He said he had applied for a concessionary bus pass with his new council.
10. In reply the Authority said it could not issue a pass because they are funded by London residents and only people living in London are eligible. It said that its normal practice is to check eligibility when someone provides proof of address. However, it accepted it could have told Mr X sooner and has changed its procedures so staff will do an eligibility check before getting proof of address.
11. The Authority offered to refund Mr X’s travel costs from 20 November until 22 April if he provided evidence of his travel costs. Mr X has recently sent the Authority some receipts.

Assessment

12. I will not start an investigation for the following reasons. The Authority, or Mr X’s council in 2015, provided him with information that the pass is only available for London residents. I appreciate Mr X may not have read the rules but that is not the fault of the Authority. In addition, it was not obvious from Mr X’s November email that he would be leaving London; the postcode was only slightly different and it was not obvious Mr X would be leaving London. So, while the Authority agreed it could have told Mr X earlier that he would not be eligible, the failing is not so great as to require an additional remedy. In reaching this view I have taken into account that Mr X had been given information about the rules, the Authority has offered to refund some travel costs, and it has changed its procedures.
13. I also will not start an investigation because I cannot achieve the outcome Mr X would like. Mr X no longer lives in London so I cannot ask the Authority to give him a pass. This is because Mr X does not qualify. However, he can use the bus pass issued by his council on London buses.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not start an investigation because the Authority has provided a fair response and I cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman