Summary: Mr B complained the Council had not considered properly how vulnerable people would access a new online parking permit application service. And the Council did not have any alternative to online payments. He obtained assistance to make his own application but he considered there would be other vulnerable people who would not be able to access the service. There was fault by the Council. It did not cause significant injustice to Mr B but it should review the system.

The complaint

1. I call the complainant Mr B. He complained the Council did not consider properly how vulnerable people would access a new online parking permit application service. And the Council did not have any alternative to online payments. He obtained assistance to make his own application but he considered there would be other vulnerable people who would not be able to access the service.

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. If we are satisfied with a council’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

4. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him. I considered the complaint and documents provided by Mr B and spoke to him. I asked the Council to comment on the complaint and provide information. I sent a draft of this statement to Mr B and the Council and considered their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of relevant law and guidance

5. The Equality Act 2010 protects the rights of individuals and suports equality of opportunity for all. It offers protection, in employment, education, the provision of goods and services, housing, transport and the carrying out of public functions.
6. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine listed protected characteristics. The Public Sector Equality Duty also sets out duties for such organisations to follow to stop discrimination. The ‘protected characteristics’ referred to in the Act are:

• age,
• disability,
• gender reassignment,
• marriage and civil partnership,
• pregnancy and maternity,
• race,
• religion or belief,
• sex, and
• sexual orientation.
   

7. Direct discrimination occurs when a person or service provider treats another less favourably than they treat or would treat others because of a protected characteristic.
8. Indirect discrimination may occur when a person or service provider takes the same approach to decision making or service provision for everyone. This may then put people sharing a protected characteristic at a particular disadvantage.
9. The Public Sector Equality Duty requires all local authorities (and bodies acting on their behalf) to have due regard to the need to:

• Eliminate unlawful discrimination, harassment and victimisation and other conduct prohibited by the Equality Act 2010.
• Advance equality of opportunity between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.
• Foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

10. The duty means public authorities must consider equality and good relations when they develop policies and deliver services. They must also keep these issues under review.

What happened

11. Mr B had two parking permits. They were due for renewal in October. In February 2020 the Council had introduced a new system which meant that residents had to apply for new permits, rather than just renew them, and the application had to be online.
12. Mr B was vulnerable for COVID-19 so did not want to attend a library for assistance with making an online application.
13. Mr B complained in late October about the new system. An officer responded but Mr B was not satisfied so asked for his complaint to be escalated. Mr B believed the first response to have been at stage one of the Council’s complaint process but it was an informal response. So when he asked for escalation he thought it would be to stage two of the process but the Council considered it to be at stage one. There was delay in doing that and it was only registered after further chasing from Mr B at the end of November. The Council sent the stage one response in January 2021. Mr B remained dissatisfied and the Council considered the complaint at stage two and wrote to Mr B in February 2021. Mr B then complained to us.

Analysis

The introduction of the new policy

14. The Council has a digital strategy and as part of that introduced the online parking permit service. The Council recognised it must ensure its services are accessible. However it went on to say it cannot guarantee the system was accessible as it was provided by a third party.
15. Where a company is providing services on behalf of a Council then we consider those actions as part of the Council carrying out its functions. The Council should be able to show it is satisfied that the system provided meets all the necessary accessibility requirements. The Council cannot do that here and that is fault.
16. But there was no indication of wider problems with people accessing the service. As part of its digital strategy the Council introduced support through a ‘Techmates’ mentoring service. That expanded over the time of the COVID-19 pandemic. The Council said this was offered to Mr B but he says it was not. This point is not critical to my view of the complaint.
17. Of particular concern to Mr B was that there was no alternative to online payments. The Council has not provided any information to show what it will do if someone is unable to make an online payment. I understand this will be rare but the Council should still be able to provide a service to those who cannot pay online.

Complaint handling

18. The Council accepted there were a number of failings in how it handled Mr B’s complaint. It was not clear about what stage he was at in the complaint process and there was delay and inaction. The Council apologised for the faults.
19. I recognise how annoying the process was for Mr B but the apology the Council made is a sufficient remedy.

Back to top

Agreed action

20. The Council should review the parking permit application service to ensure it meets accessibility requirements and that there is a method for ensuring people who cannot make online payments can still access the service. It should complete this review and put any necessary changes in place within two months of the final decision and tell us of the outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

21. There was fault by the Council but it did not cause significant injustice to Mr B but it should review the system.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman