The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to renew the complainant’s taxi driver licence and require him to apply as a new applicant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council refused to renew his taxi driver licence based false information. He says the Council lied to him and he says the policy did not change as the Council said.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate 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), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and information about the new policy. I also considered our Assessment Code.
My assessment
In 2021 the Council suspended Mr X’s licence because there was a delay by Mr X in providing his Disclosure and Barring Service (DBS) certificate. In January 2022 the Council sent Mr X a letter it had sent to all drivers in November 2021 about changes to the licensing policy. The letter referred to the new policy and quoted, “if a driver’s licence expires before the licence holder submitting a complete and valid application, then a new application will be required”.
In September 2023 Mr X applied to the DBS service for a new certificate. Mr X’s licence was due to expire on 10 December. Mr X says he called the Council on 7 December and an officer told him if he provided the rest of the renewal documents the Council would suspend the licence until Mr X received his DBS certificate.
Mr X visited the Council on 8 December to renew his licence. He provided all the information apart from the DBS certificate. The Council did not process the renewal because Mr X could not provide his DBS certificate.
Mr X’s licence expired on 10 December. He received his DBS certificate on 12 December. The Council said he must reapply as a new applicant.
Mr X complained. He said he was told he should renew with the documents he had and the Council would suspend the licence until he provided the DBS certificate. He also said he had not been told about the new policy and the Council had previously suspended his licence pending receipt of information. Mr X wanted to appeal.
The Council said it changed the policy in 2021 and, since then, drivers must make a new application if they do not submit a complete application before the licence expired. The Council explained it had notified all drivers of the change in 2021. It said there was no record of Mr X calling the Council on 7 December. There was a record of a call on 1 December when Mr X said he had applied for a new certificate and he referred to the Council asking him to contact the licensing team in October because he had ticked to say he had a conviction. The Council said there was no right of appeal because the licence had expired. The Council said it is the responsibility of the driver to ensure they renew before the licence expires.
I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. The revised policy says the Council will treat a driver as a new applicant if they do not submit a complete renewal application before the existing licence expires. Mr X could not submit a complete renewal because he did not receive his DBS certificate before his licence expired. The Council’s decision to require Mr X to submit a new application reflects the policy so there is no reason to start an investigation. In addition, I have seen evidence the Council notified drivers of the new policy in 2021 and it sent Mr X information in 2022.
Mr X says he spoke to an officer on 7 December; the Council has no record of this call. Due to a lack of evidence I cannot comment on whether this call took place. However, even if an officer provided misleading information (and there is no evidence this happened) it would not have affected the outcome. This is because any conversation did not influence that Mr X needed to renew by 10 December or change that he did not receive his certificate until 12 December. In addition, it is correct that the Council could not suspend the licence because, since 2021, all failed renewals require a new application. The Council correctly explained Mr X cannot appeal because, as the licence had expired, there was nothing to appeal.
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