Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about accessibility arrangements at Council car parks and access to beach facilities because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council's actions to justify an investigation. It is unlikely an investigation would achieve anything more than the Council has already committed to do.

The complaint

1. Mr X, a full-time wheelchair user, complains the Council has failed to provide safe and accessible access to the beach and surrounding public amenities. He says inaccessible surfaces and height barriers prevent him accessing Council-owned sites and exclude mobility-adapted vehicles. He also says the Council failed to properly consider its duties under the Equality Act 2010, including reasonable adjustments and the Public Sector Equality Duty.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
5. Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X says the Council failed to provide accessible access to a beach and surrounding amenities and failed to properly consider the needs of disabled users when retaining height barriers at some of its car parks.
9. The Council explained that most of its car parks do not have height barriers. It said barriers remain at certain sites to help prevent unauthorised encampments and damage caused by vehicles not suited to the car parks. It also explained it had considered alternative measures but did not consider them to be as effective.
10. The Council also explained the site is surrounded by a Site of Special Scientific Interest (SSSI), a protected environmental designation which restricts the types of alterations that can be carried out. It says these restrictions limit its ability to provide a hard surfaced route beyond the car park. It also explained the timber boardwalk referred to by Mr X is not a Council asset and was installed by a third party.
11. It is unlikely an investigation would find fault with the Council. The Council has shown it considered the accessibility concerns raised by Mr X and acted to address them. It carried out works at the car park to improve access from the car park edge. It also considered and responded to Mr X's proposed adjustments.
12. The Council has obtained specialist accessibility advice and told us it is reviewing its existing barrier arrangements to determine whether changes are needed. It is unlikely an investigation would be able to achieve anything more than this. So, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X's complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council's actions to justify an investigation and any investigation would be unlikely to achieve more than the Council has already agreed to do.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman