Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about difficulties encountered by the complainant after a ferry was cancelled. This is because the Council has provided a proportionate response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, says the Council did not provide alternative transport, or information, after a ferry was cancelled. He says there was nobody to help and no contingency plan.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. There is a ferry across a lake which takes about 10 minutes.
5. Mr X, and some friends, took the ferry and went for a walk. When they returned they found the ferry had been cancelled and there were no buses. Mr X says they were forced to walk, in the dark, along a narrow road to a pub and call a taxi. The taxi cost £60. Mr X says the incident was stressful, time consuming and expensive.
6. Mr X says the Council should have provided alternative transport and more information and support.
7. The Council apologised for the cancellation and said there had been an unexpected mechanical failure with the ferry. It said it does not guarantee return trips and this is explained on the signs. The Council said it cannot provide a back-up service but said it would improve the signs to give more information about alternative transport options and to make it clear it cannot guarantee the service. The Council said it would remain the responsibility of the passenger to pay for any alternative transport. The Council declined Mr X’s request to reimburse the fare.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a satisfactory response. It explained why the ferry was cancelled and why it cannot guarantee the service. It apologised for the inconvenience and said it would take steps to improve the information it provides. This is a satisfactory response and, once this is taken into account, there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation. Even if more information had been available, it would remain that a taxi was the only option and Mr X would still have had to pay for it. In addition, while the Council agrees it should provide more information, Mr X was able to find alternative transport. And, as the Council does not guarantee the service, there is no scope for us to ask it to refund the £60 or provide a back-up service when the ferry fails.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a satisfactory response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman