The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to renew the complainant’s disability-based Freedom Pass. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, disagrees with the Council’s decision not to renew her Freedom Pass (disability). She says she qualifies because she get high-rate mobility and says the Council has misinterpreted the rules. Ms X says it is expensive to travel and she wants the Council to renew the pass.
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 an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council. This includes Ms X’s Freedom Pass application, proof of her Personal Independence Payment (PIP), and the decision letters. I also considered our Assessment Code and comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.
My assessment
People qualify for a pass if they are blind or partially sighted, are profoundly deaf or without speech, have a disability which has a substantial impact on walking, have no arms or a learning disability. People also qualify if they have a medical condition which means a driving licence would be refused.
The Council also issues a pass to people who get Disability Living Allowance (DLA) high mobility or eight “moving around” points within PIP.
The Council previously issued a pass to Ms X on the grounds that she would be refused a driving licence. Ms X applied to renew her pass. She said she gets DLA high mobility and 12 PIP points for “planning a journey”. Ms X said she holds a driving licence and drives.
The Council decided not to renew the Freedom Pass because Ms X does not meet any of the qualifying rules. It explained that she does not hold a qualifying award of DLA or PIP and she declared she holds a driving licence.
I have seen Ms X’s PIP decision letter which says she gets no points for “moving around”. She has been awarded 12 points for “planning a journey”. Because Ms X gets 12 points she receives PIP mobility at the enhanced rate.
I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The Council’s decision flows from the Freedom Pass rules and from the evidence provided by Ms X. Ms X has a driving licence and does not receive eight “moving arounds” points with PIP or DLA high rate mobility. She receives the enhanced rate of PIP but this is not the same as DLA high mobility and simply means she qualifies for PIP at the higher payment rate.
There is nothing to suggest Ms X’s walking is significantly impaired and this is supported by her PIP award which awarded no points for “moving around”. Ms X cannot qualify for the reason of being refused a driving licence because she has a licence. Ms X says there is nothing to prevent people with a driving licence having a pass; but, Ms X does not qualify for a pass because she does not meet any of the qualifying conditions. There is nothing to suggest the Council has misinterpreted the rules or has failed to process the application correctly.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman