Summary: Mr C complained the Council failed to respond to him following an online consultation event about what consideration it had given to residents with disabilities as part of its proposed traffic management scheme. Mr C said this made him feel the Council was overlooking and ignoring his needs as a person with a disability. We found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action of an apology, symbolic payment and service improvements provides a suitable remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr C, complains the Council failed to respond to him following an online consultation event in April 2023 about what consideration it had given to residents with disabilities as part of its proposed traffic management scheme.
2. Mr C says the Council’s failure to respond to him makes him feel it is overlooking and ignoring his needs as a person with a disability.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. 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

5. I read the papers provided by Mr C and discussed the complaint with him. I have also considered information from the Council. I have explained my draft decision to Mr C and the Council and considered the comments received before reaching my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

6. Mr C sent an email dated 18 April 2023 to the Council following what he describes as a consultation over teams hosted by the Council the previous week. Mr C asked what consideration had been given to residents with disabilities as part of its proposals and whether there would be any specific consultation with disabled residents. Mr C did not receive a reply and sent a reminder dated 3 May.
7. Mr C forwarded the correspondence to the Council’s Chief Executive on 2 June as he had still not received a reply and asked for the matter to be treated as a formal complaint. Mr C received a same day acknowledgement that the matter would be dealt with under the Council’s complaint procedure. Mr C chased the matter on 3 August as he had not received anything further.
8. The Council wrote to Mr C on 8 August to say he should receive a reply within the next 15 working days or receive an explanation if this was not possible. This did not happen. Mr C chased the matter on 20 September.
9. The Council wrote to Mr C on 25 September with an attached response to his complaint. This did not address the complaint he had raised above but related to a separate matter.
10. In responding to the Ombudsman, the Council has confirmed the April 2023 consultation event was one of two online events held for community representatives to discuss concerns and for the Council to receive any comments about traffic and streets within particular areas. It has also provided an overview of its consultation.
11. The Council apologised for the apparent delay in Mr C receiving a satisfactory answer to his complaint and highlighted the volume of correspondence received from Mr C including through his local councillor, information requests and directly with officers. The Council has provided the Ombudsman with a copy of correspondence with Mr C which relates to an entirely separate complaint about the installation of barriers and public comments of a councillor.

My consideration

12. Following the Council’s online meeting in April 2023, Mr C asked a straightforward question about what consideration had been given to residents with disabilities as part of the proposals and whether there would be any specific consultation with disabled residents. The Council did not provide a reply despite a reminder.
13. Mr C then made a formal complaint about the Council’s failure to reply to his information request. Mr C again had to chase a response from the Council. The Council then sent a response which did not address his complaint. Mr C was then put to the avoidable time and trouble in making a complaint to the Ombudsman.
14. It is acknowledged that a single information request may be overlooked but I am concerned this was not picked up when Mr C sent a reminder which then resulted in a formal complaint. The Council compounded this poor communication by failing to provide a response to Mr C’s complaint under its complaint procedure and instead writing to him about another matter. This is fault.
15. I am satisfied Mr C will have been caused avoidable inconvenience and frustration.

Back to top

Agreed action

16. The Council will take the following action to provide a suitable remedy to Mr C:
1. write to Mr C to apologise for its poor communication and its failure to respond to his subsequent complaint within one month of my final decision;
2. pay Mr C £100 to recognise his inconvenience and frustration within one month of my final decision;
3. review how transport related queries from the public are logged and dealt with to ensure these are followed up as necessary and dealt with in a timely manner within three months of my final decision; and
4. review its complaint procedure and take any necessary action to ensure complaints receive a reply in accordance with the Council’s published complaint policy and correspond to the complaint as made within three months of my final decision.
17. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The organisation should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
18. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

19. I have completed my investigation as I have found fault by the Council but consider the agreed action above provides a suitable remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman