Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to grant her a Freedom Pass. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision to justify us investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the Council’s decision not to grant her a Freedom Pass. She believes the Council has not properly considered the medical evidence she provided and refused her application without a fair assessment.
2. She says the Council’s decision has impacted her ability to travel safely and independently.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
5. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Department for Transport’s Guidance on assessing eligibility of disabled people for concessionary travel (the DfT Guidance).

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X applied for a Freedom Pass on the grounds her mental and physical health conditions make travel extremely difficult for her. The Council assessed her application and determined she did not meet the eligibility criteria. Ms X disagrees with the Council’s decision and believes it has not properly considered her medical evidence or her entitlement under the Personal Independence Payment (PIP). She wants the Council to approve her application.
7. I acknowledge Ms X has 12 points under the planning and following a journey component of PIP. The DfT Guidance says that an applicant may automatically qualify for a Freedom Pass if they receive at least 8 points against the moving around and/or communicating verbally components. The planning and following a journey component is separate from this. Therefore, Ms X does not automatically qualify for a Freedom Pass.
8. For applicants that do not automatically qualify for a Freedom Pass, they may apply under other discretionary grounds which require more detailed assessment. These include where the person has a disability, or has suffered an injury, which has left them with a substantial and long-term adverse effect on their ability to walk.
9. The evidence I have seen shows the Council considered Ms X’s application, her medical evidence and the results of her mobility assessment against the DfT Guidance. Whilst I acknowledge Ms X’s health conditions affect her mobility and ability to travel, I am satisfied the Council has properly considered her evidence and reached a decision it was entitled to. As there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision, we cannot question the outcome.
10. I acknowledge Ms X remains unhappy with the decision and she has provided us with further updated medical evidence about how her conditions affect her mobility. We are not an appeal body and we cannot overturn the Council’s decision. It remains open to Ms X to submit a new application and provide any updated medical evidence the Council has not previously considered.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman