Summary: Mrs X complained about a decision to close bus stops in the city centre and move bus services to start and terminate at a bus station. She said the changes are discriminatory and caused her hardship. The Council was not the decision maker on bus route changes. It was therefore not at fault for any impact the changes may have had on Mrs X or other bus users.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about a decision to close bus stops in the city centre and move the bus services to start and terminate at a bus station, which is over 300 metres away from the city centre.
2. Mrs X said the Council failed to consider the impact on elderly and disabled people, who will now have to walk further and on a steep path to get to and from the city centre. She said the Council failed to consider its public sector equality duty.
3. Mrs X said she has been disadvantaged by the changes and excluded from the city centre. She said she cannot use buses to socialise as she did before, affecting her mental health.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

6. As part of the investigation, I considered the complaint and the information Mrs X provided.
7. I made written enquiries of the Council and considered its response along with relevant law and guidance.
8. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Transport Act 1985

9. The Transport Act 1985 changed the law on road passenger transport, transferring the operations of the National Bus Company to the private sector (Chapter 67). It also set up Traffic Commissioners (Sections 3 to 5).

Local bus services

10. The Traffic Commissioner is responsible for the licensing and registration of local bus services.
11. Once a bus operator registers their services with the Traffic Commissioner, they must run their bus services at the times stated, and along the routes specified.
12. Bus operators must apply to the Traffic Commissioner to make changes to a bus service route or timetable. They must also tell the local council.
13. The local council can ask the Traffic Commissioner to impose conditions on the licence for a bus service. The conditions could affect a bus route or where a bus can stop, but the decision rests with the Traffic Commissioner.

The Equality Act 2010

14. The Equality Act 2010 provides a legal framework to protect the rights of individuals and advance 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.
15. The Equality Act makes it unlawful for organisations carrying out public functions to discriminate on any of the nine protected characteristics listed in the Equality Act 2010. They must also have regard to the general duties aimed at eliminating discrimination under the Public Sector Equality Duty.
16. The nine protected characteristics under the Act includes age and disability.
17. 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 an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
18. 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.
19. 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; and
• foster good relations between people who share a protected characteristic and those who do not.

What happened

20. I have summarised below some key events leading to Mrs X’s complaint. This is not intended to be a detailed account of what took place.
21. Mrs X has physical disabilities entitling her to a free bus pass. She travelled by bus to access the main city centre pedestrian and shopping area.
22. Local bus operators decided to move the start and end points of several city centre bus services from on street stops and relocate them into the two city centre bus stations.
23. The Council was in contact with bus operators in April 2023 about the proposed bus stop changes, and to allocate stands within the bus stations.
24. Mrs X emailed the Council’s public transport department about the changes, and about the cancellation of a bus service, on 19 August 2023.
25. A Council officer replied to Mrs X on 21 August 2023. They said, “The move of buses between bus stations was as part of a recommendation by my team which was supported by bus operators within the Leicester buses partnership.” The officer explained the aim of the changes was to have buses terminating at bus stations, where there are enhanced facilities, and to provide marginally quicker running times for the buses. They also said the missing services were not due to the change in stop, but because bus operators faced driver shortages impacting their ability to run services as frequently.
26. Mrs X complained to the Council about the bus stop changes on 4 December 2023. She said the changes impacted her ability to access the city centre (because of her disability and mobility struggles), and the Council failed to comply with its duties under the Equality Act 2010. She said she raised the issue with her councillor in July, but the Council did nothing to address her concerns.
27. Mrs X said she has a free bus pass as she cannot walk far without pain. However, her bus pass has not helped since July 2023 when bus stops were moved far out of the city centre, to a bus station which is at the bottom of a hill.
28. Mrs X said she tried to get a bus from one of the bus stations in July, but there were signs saying, ‘there are no buses from this stop’. The next time she tried to get the same bus it took her to another bus station, and she had to walk up a long, steep hill to get into town, causing her pain. She was later told this is where buses would stop from now on.
29. Mrs X asked to see the equality impact assessment the Council carried out when deciding to move the bus stops. She wanted the Council to apologise, reinstate the old bus stops, and compensate her for discrimination.
30. The Council wrote to Mrs X on 31 January 2024 in response to her concerns. It said, in April 2023, the boarding and alighting points of several city centre bus services were moved from on street stops and relocated into the city’s two bus stations. The Council announced and promoted the changes by placing notices in affected bus stops. Bus operators also placed notices within buses scheduled for change.
31. The Council explained it is not responsible for bus timetables, routes, or fares – bus operators are. It recognised Mrs X considered the changes disadvantaged some users, but it said the distance between the bus station and the previous on-street stop she referred to is only 233 metres. It said the path from the bus station into the city centre is a shallow gradient with dropped kerbs and zebra crossings for pedestrians and people with mobility issues. The Council reassessed the street lighting and found it provides good coverage.
32. The Council accepted the bus station is not immediately next to the city centre pedestrian area, but said it provides a good public transport connection to it. It also said some bus services will continue to stop at on street points within the city centre if passengers want to change between services. It pointed out that holders of concessionary travel passes could do so for free.
33. The Council acknowledged the free city centre bus service it was trialling does not stop at one of the bus stations and does not operate all day, every day of the week. It said this was not financially feasible. It said it would consider changes at the end of the trial period.
34. Mrs X was not satisfied with the Council’s response, and asked to escalate her complaint to stage two.
35. The Council’s final response said it conducts equality impact assessments on changes it is responsible for. However, it said the Council is not the decision maker on bus routes. Councils are responsible for physical bus stop infrastructure, like shelters. The bus service changes were made by bus operators. The Council therefore did not conduct any equality impact assessments in this case.

My investigation

36. Mrs X told us the Council reorganised public transport without carrying out equality impact assessments. She said this resulted in discrimination against elderly and disabled people, including herself.
37. Mrs X disputed the Council’s assertion about the distance between the two bus stations being 233 metres. She said it is 294 metres. She said the Council removed the previous bus stops and moved them 337 metres down a hill. She now faces hardship and feels excluded from the city centre.
38. Mrs X said when she contacted the Council about the changes an officer told her the removal of bus stops and relocation to a bus station was part of recommendations by the Council. However, when she complained the Council tried to avoid the issue by saying the decision was made by bus companies.
39. The Council told me the city centre is part of a pedestrian and cycle priority zone. Most vehicles (including buses) can only access its perimeter, except during specific times.
40. The Council said it was not the decision maker on the bus route changes Mrs X complained about. It cannot decide the location of bus stops on a bus route. The relevant powers rest with the Traffic Commissioner. The Council owns and manages both city bus stations. Its role was to coordinate the changes to the bus route, including assigning stands and reissuing on-street timetables.
41. The Council believes Mrs X interpreted the word ‘recommended’ out of context when she received an email from a Council officer about the changes. The recommendation referred to the way bus services were deployed and arranged. It did not represent the decision taken by bus operators to move bus stops from kerbside locations.
42. The Council considers the bus providers’ route changes benefit bus users, including those with protected characteristics, by providing them with higher quality waiting facilities, toilets, café and shop facilities, reliability improvements, and access to the wider city network.
43. The Council said it has invested in accessible bus services. This has included raised kerbs for level access, and audio and visual announcements at bus stops. The city’s bus stations also feature seating, tactile surfacing, disabled toilet facilities, city council staff, and temperature-controlled environments.
44. The Council also operates a free bus service connecting locations around the city, which stops about 100 metres from one of the bus stations.
45. The Council refutes Mrs X’s claim that pedestrian access involves a steep hill. It said the gradient is shallow, at 1 in 40 (meaning it rises by 1 unit for every 40 units of horizontal distance). The route is segregated from motor traffic, has a good surface, has seating, and lighting.

Analysis

46. It is the Traffic Commissioner’s role to issue a licence for bus services. This will include details on the timetable and route. The application is made by the bus operator. They must also apply to the Commissioner if they want to change the timetable or route, but they must tell the Council.
47. The decision to move some city centre bus stops to within bus stations was made by bus operators, not the Council. It was up to the Traffic Commissioner to approve the changes.
48. I found some of Mrs X’s concerns arose after a Council officer sent a misleading email to her, suggesting the Council made recommendations about the changes. Mrs X considered this meant the Council was, at least in part, responsible for the decision to move the bus stops. The Council sought to clarify the situation, but Mrs X thought the Council was trying to deny its responsibilities. However, I found the Council did not have any significant role or powers in the decision-making process. It was down to the bus operators and the Traffic Commissioner.
49. The Ombudsman can only investigate maladministration or service failure in connection with the exercise of the Council’s administrative functions.
50. The decision to change the bus route in this case was one for the bus operators, through the Traffic Commissioner. The Council is only ‘told’ about the change.
51. Neither the Traffic Commissioner or the bus operators are bodies within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, and I therefore cannot comment on any decisions they made.
52. I appreciate Mrs X considers the Council is responsible for public transport services, and should therefore have completed equality impact assessments for the route changes. However, that was not the case here. The Transport Act 1985 limited the role of local transport authorities outside of London to providing infrastructure for services, as well as some funding for concessionary schemes and services not otherwise commercially viable. As above, the Council was not the decision maker and was therefore not under a duty to carry out equality impact assessments for the route changes.
53. The Council can ask the Traffic Commissioner to impose conditions on a bus operator’s licence, which can include details on bus stops or routes. However, on the evidence seen, the Council considers the changes provide improved facilities, and benefit all users. Ultimately, it is the Traffic Commissioner’s decision to approve bus route changes. And I have not seen evidence to suggest the decision would have been different if the Council had objected based on the impact for elderly and disabled people.
54. The Council does have a duty to carry out equality impact assessments for the bus stations it manages. However, this was not part of Mrs X’s complaint, and I have not seen evidence conditions within the bus stations fail to comply with the Council’s duties under the Equality Act 2010.
55. I found the Council was not the decision maker for bus route changes, and was therefore not at fault for any impact the changes may have had on Mrs X or other bus users.

Back to top

Final decision

56. I found the Council was not the decision maker on bus route changes. It was therefore not at fault for any impact the changes may have had on Mrs X or other bus users.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman