Summary: Mr Z complains about the response from the Council after he raised concerns over the safety of his local bus stop. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely that we would find fault in how the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr Z complains about
• the response from the Council after he raised concerns over the safety of his local bus stop. He says that the solutions proposed by the Council are not satisfactory and the bus stop remains a danger to residents;
• the Council not fulfilling its duty under Equality Act 2010 because the bus stop cannot be easily accessed by disabled residents.

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. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe it is unlikely we would find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr Z who had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.
5. I considered the responses and explanations the Council gave Mr Z.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr Z complained to the Council about his local bus stop. He said that the bus stop does not comply with relevant legislation and poses a danger to the users, especially disabled bus users.
7. In his complaint Mr Z described the conditions that he considers to be noncompliant and he also proposed solutions. In his opinion the following changes are required to make the bus stop safer:
• increasing the size of the bus stop,
• installing a working streetlight,
• changing the positioning of the bus,
• installing a crossing,
• moving the bus stop to the green triangle on the opposite side of the road.
8. The Council responded and explained what amendments would and would not be possible. It contacted the bus service provider to find out how many users the bus stop serves. It decided that there should be notices put up on the bus stop to inform the users of other nearby bus stops that might be more suitable.
9. Mr Z disagrees with that decision and thinks the Council should do more. The Ombudsman cannot question a decision taken without fault. We look at the process the Council followed in reaching its decision.
10. Based on the information provided by Mr Z and the Council I find the explanations Council gave demonstrate it had given due regard to its public sector equality duties. This is because the Council has consciously thought about the accessibility of this bus stop and it has taken steps to identify areas for improvement to increase accessibility, albeit Mr Z does not consider those solutions to be sufficient.
11. The Ombudsman’s role is to decide whether there was any fault in how the Council considered the issue of accessibility and how it considered its responsibilities under the Equality Act 2010. It is not our role to decide whether the Council’s actions and decisions are in breach of the Equality Act 2010. This is something only a Court can determine. Further, the Ombudsman cannot decide whether the Council has not done enough, or that it should do more, to meet its duties under the Act.
12. In this case, the Council has demonstrated it has properly considered the matter of safety and accessibility and shown it has given due regard to its duties under the public sector equality duty. An investigation is there unlikely to find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely that we would find fault in how the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman