Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s handling of a bus stand closure because we could not add to the Authority’s response and Mr Y has not suffered significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr Y complains about the Authority’s handling of a bus stand closure at a bus station. He says a member of staff should have been available to direct him to the alternative stand.
2. Mr Y says the incident caused stress and anxiety. He seeks financial compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr Y and the Authority.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr Y complained to the Authority about its handling of a bus stand closure at a bus station. Mr Y says he has been put at a disadvantage due to his disability. He said a member of staff should have been available at the closed bus stand, to redirect him to the alternative one. Mr Y says the confusion resulted in him missing his bus.
8. The Authority acknowledged Mr Y’s concerns and apologised for his experience. It explained the bus stand had to be taken out of service to undergo emergency repair work. The Authority advised signage was in place to direct passengers to the alternative bus stand, but it accepted the need for providing clearer communication for passengers requiring additional assistance. It said members of staff were available, but there is an expectation for staff to monitor and patrol the entire bus station when on duty and not remain in one place. The Authority said it would take learning from Mr Y’s complaint and said it will review its procedures to avoid similar issues from occurring in the future.
9. We could add nothing further to the Authority’s response and therefore will not investigate this complaint further. The Authority accepts it needs to consider clearer communication and additional onsite support when temporary changes within the bus station are introduced. It also provided an effective apology to Mr Y in line with our guidance. Whilst I acknowledge the inconvenience caused to Mr Y by this incident, I do not consider him suffering significant personal injustice.
10. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
11. I understand Mr Y is seeking financial compensation from the Authority. We do not recommend that organisations pay compensation. Sometimes we recommend that organisations pay a symbolic payment to remedy injustice caused by fault. However, where there is insufficient evidence of significant personal injustice, we do not consider remedies.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Y’s complaint because we could not add to the Authority’s response and Mr Y has not suffered significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman