The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a complaint about councillor conduct as any fault by the Council has not caused the complainant a level of injustice serious enough to warrant our involvement.
The complaint
Mrs X complained to the Council about the conduct of a councillor at a meeting of residents to discuss on-going parking issues. Mrs X does not consider the Council properly considered her complaint.
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 alleged fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6)) We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether an organisation’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X complained to the Council, that at a residents meeting in March 2022, a councillor was unable to give updates on commitments she had made in July and October 2020 about installing/updating two road signs.
In its complaint decision, the Council said it would not investigate actions from 2020 as under its complaint procedure, it only considers complaints about matters taking place in the six months prior to the complaint, unless there are exceptional circumstances. The Council also said that it was not a breach of the code of conduct for the councillor not to have had a note taker present at the meeting.
Mrs X feels these responses indicate the Council misconstrued her complaint. Mrs X was not as such complaining about events from 2020, but that the councillor was unable to provide updates about them at the meeting. Mrs X was also not complaining that a note taker was not at the meeting but that the councillor should have kept her own notes and brought those to the meeting to provide updates. Mrs X felt the councillor fell short of the standards for councillors in respect of accountability in this regard.
I recognise why Mrs X feels the Council misconstrued her complaint. However, the Council did consider the substantive aspect of it and as such I do not consider any fault by the Council caused Mrs X a significant injustice. In the Council’s view, that the councillor was unable to provide updates at the meeting did not represent a breach of the code of conduct. The Council considered it was reasonable for the councillor to say she would need to check back through her records to provide the update, after she had acknowledged at the meeting that she was unable to do so. I do not consider this assessment is impacted by the alleged Council fault and as such, I cannot be critical of it.
For these reasons, we will not investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because I do not consider that any Council fault caused Mrs X a significant injustice or that we can be critical of the Council’s decision on the complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman