The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council delayed completing a taxi change of ownership application. This is because any injustice to the complainant is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains that the Council delayed completing his application to transfer the ownership of his taxi. Mr X said the application took two weeks which cause him frustration and meant he had to insure his vehicle longer than he planned.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because I do not consider that any injustice he has suffered is significant enough to justify our further involvement. The delay in completing the application was relatively short, and the Council have apologised to Mr X for this and for not making it clear what information he needed to provide. I am satisfied that the Council has responded to these matters appropriately.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered a significant injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman