Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to remove a bus service. There is not enough evidence of fault, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X said the Council were wrong to remove a bus service, it had previously funded. Mrs X said it had not properly considered the impact on people who live in rural communities and who may have additional access and support needs.
2. Mrs X said this means she cannot now easily access all the community facilities she needs including health facilities.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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)
4. 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mrs X said the Council did not give the due consideration it should gave done, when it removed a local bus service. Mrs X said she relied on this service to get access to a nearby town including a hospital.
7. The Council replied and explained it had monitored the usage of the bus service over several months to assess the need for it. It said it had raised the matter in a cabinet meeting and the relevant committee had decided the funds were no longer justified.
8. The Council said in its response that:
• The service was only used by a small number of people;
• the service provided a limited service across three days per week, and;
• another bus service provided access to a nearby town that also had a hospital.
9. Given the Council’s explanations here, it is unlikely we would find fault in the way it decided to remove this service. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at how the Council made its decision. If we consider there was no fault here, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether others disagree with the decision.
10. Additionally, Mrs X wants the Council to ensure funding is available to access the local town centre in the manner she could previously. We could not direct the Council on how to use its resources in this manner, therefore we cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault and we cannot achieve the outcome she is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman