The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the provision of accessible gym equipment in the Council’s leisure centres because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council lacked accessible gym equipment in its leisure centres. He said the lack of accessible provision had left him feeling depressed and worthless; he said he had also been impacted financially by having to pay a premium for private gyms.
Mr X believed that the Council had breached the Equality Act 2010. He wanted it to take advice from experts in the field, to ensure it complied with the law.
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 or continue an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome; or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants; or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint; or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended) We cannot decide if an organisation has breached the Equality Act as this can only be done by the courts. But we can make decisions about whether or not an organisation has properly taken account of an individual’s rights in its treatment of them.
Organisations will often be able to show they have properly taken account of the Equality Act if they have considered the impact their decisions will have on the individuals affected and these decisions can be challenged, reviewed or appealed.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X uses two of the Council’s leisure centres: his nearest centre, that I shall refer to as Centre A, and a second centre, that I shall refer to as Centre B. He complained that Centre A has only one piece of accessible gym equipment, that is not always available for use. This means he sometimes has to travel to Centre B, which has only three items of accessible gym equipment. He said this provision is inadequate for the needs of the area’s disabled population.
The Council explained it is due to invest in equipment for Centre A during 2024, and said it would consider Mr X’s recommendations, and take advice, during that process. It explained it was conducting an audit of its fitness kit provision, and said it would replace equipment with accessible equipment on an ongoing basis across all of its leisure centres.
We will not investigate Mr X's complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. If we did investigate and find fault causing injustice, we would be likely to recommend the Council take the actions that it is already proposing to take during 2024.
It remains open to Mr X to continue to provide recommendations for the Council to consider as it updates its provision. The Council may not implement all of Mr X's suggestions, but it should have due regard to them. It is also open to Mr X to complain further in future, should the Council make any specific decisions about equipment that he believes do not take the Equality Act into account, or should there be significant delays in the updating process. However, it is not for us to decide what is or is not a reasonable adjustment, and court action remains an option if Mr X wishes to pursue a discrimination claim.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman