8. Before we decide whether we should investigate a complaint in more detail, we look at whether there are signs the organisation concerned has got something wrong. We do this by comparing what should have happened to what did happen.
9. As this is a case where the facts are not disputed, we have taken a timely and proportionate approach to reach a decision. We have done this by relying on the information Mr A presented and without requesting additional evidence. Having done this, we have seen that DVLA acted in line with its published timescales when it updated the address on Mr A’s driving licence.
10. Mr A is unhappy with how long DVLA took to process his application to change the address on his driving licence.
11. DVLA’s Coronavirus (COVID-19) update was on its website when Mr A applied to change the details on his licence. The update said it was taking six to ten weeks to process paper applications (like the one Mr A sent). As DVLA received his application on 6 July, it should have re-issued Mr A’s driving licence between 17 August and 14 September. It did so on 11 September. We are satisfied it met the relevant standard.
12. Having looked at Mr A’s complaint, we fully understand the cost of how long DVLA took to make the changes to his licence. Beyond the financial impact, it was undoubtedly a frustrating and worrying experience for him.
13. In looking at what happened, we are happy that DVLA acted in line with its published timescales. Therefore, we do not consider it has done anything wrong. While the time Mr A waited was significantly longer than the usual four-week turnaround, we consider the exceptional circumstances caused by COVID-19 sufficiently explain the delay.