The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Freedom Pass because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
The Council has refused to provide Mr B with a Freedom Pass. Mr B feels this is discriminatory. Mr B does not struggle to move about but needs access to public transport to travel safely and independently. Without the Freedom Pass Mr B’s parents are helping him walk to college as they say it is not safe for him to walk alone with the risk he may run out into the road.
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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Freedom Pass is a travelcard for qualifying Londoners that offers free access to public transport across the Transport for London network.
Mr B applied for the disabled persons freedom pass. The Council rejected Mr B’s application because he did not meet the criteria. Mr B appealed and the Council rejected the appeal, with a letter explaining its reasons. The Council explained Mr B does not meet the mobility criteria which is based only on physical walking difficulties and not on any other factors.
The Freedom Pass scheme is governed by the general legislation on concessionary fares in England (Transport Act 2000 and Concessionary Bus Travel Act 2007). As well as specific London provisions contained in the Greater London Authority Act 1999 and the Transport Act 2000.
Mr B believes the Council is discriminatory between those receiving Disability Living Allowance (DLA) and Personal Independence Payments (PIP) as you automatically get a Freedom Pass if you receive the higher rate mobility component of DLA but must receive eight points of more in the ‘moving around component of the PIP.
The eligibility criteria are set out in guidance from the Department for Transport. The Ombudsman would not find fault in the Council following statutory guidance.
It is unlikely the Ombudsman would find evidence of fault in this case. The Council has assessed Mr B’s application in line with the law, government guidance, and its own policy. The Council has reconsidered Mr B’s application at appeal. Therefore, it has followed the correct process to reach its decision and further investigation is unlikely to lead to a different outcome.
Mr B still has access to public transport to travel safely and independently but would have to pay for it.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman