The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Councils’ leisure services provider taking direct debits from the complainant’s bank account without telling her the service provider had changed, and for its pursuit of her for missed payments. The complainant had her payments refunded under the direct debit guarantee and the Council has agreed not to pursue for the missed membership payments. It is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Ms X, complains the Council changed its leisure centre operator without advising customers. The new company continued to take direct debits from her bank account for membership fees.
Ms X believes the money was unlawfully taken from her bank account and should be investigated further under financial conduct rules for organisations which follow the direct debit guarantee.
She wants to re-join the gym without having to repay the missed payments.
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: any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Ms X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council’s leisure centres were operated by company A. Ms X had a gym membership which she paid by direct debit through her bank account.
Company B took over the operation of the Council’s leisure centres. Ms X says she was not told about the change of company name. Because she did not recognise the name on the direct debit Ms X stopped the payments. Her bank refunded the money taken by company B.
Ms X says she cancelled her gym membership. Unfortunately, she sent the email to a ‘do not reply’ email address. Therefore, as Company B did not know she had cancelled her membership, her account was marked as in debt and letters were sent to Ms X requesting the missed payments.
The Council says emails were sent to customers advising Company B was taking over operation of the gym. In response to her complaint the Council agreed to stop chasing her for the cancelled direct debits. However, it has advised if she wants to re-join the gym, she will need to pay the missed fees.
I accept that Ms X found the situation stressful, however the bank refunded the direct debits taken by Company B and the Council agreed to stop pursuing her for the missed payments. It is not unreasonable for Council to require her to repay the missed payments if she decides to re-join the gym.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because for the reasons given above we do not consider the injustice suffered to be so significant as to warrant an investigation. Nor do we consider it likely that further investigation will lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman