The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr and Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to prosecute a retailer for alleged breaches of consumer protection legislation. This is because we could not achieve any worthwhile outcome for them.
The complaint
The complainants, Mr and Mrs X, complain the Council has failed to take action against a retailer for operating a guarantee scheme which may be unlawful.
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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr and Mrs X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
Background
Mr and Mrs X complained to the Council in late 2021 about a product they had bought as they believed the guarantee supplied by the retailer did not comply with consumer protection legislation. They say the Council has confirmed the guarantee may be unlawful but it declined to prosecute the business. Instead it advised that if they wished to pursue the matter they may make a civil claim against the retailer. Mr and Mrs X are unhappy with the Council’s response and say the Council has failed to protect their interests as consumers.
My assessment
Councils have powers to enforce most consumer protection legislation through their Trading Standards departments. A council’s role when dealing with Trading Standards complaints is to enforce the law rather to act in individual cases between consumers and the businesses they complain about.
In this case the Council has declined to pursue the matter as prosecution would not be in-line with its policy. This decision is a matter of professional judgement and we could not say the Council must prosecute against its policy and officer judgement.
The Council’s decision also does not cause Mr and Mrs X significant injustice. This is because any prosecution by the Council, whether successful or not, would not provide Mr and Mrs X with a remedy for their faulty product or the allegedly unlawful guarantee. Their injustice stems from their issues with the business and the Council has explained they may wish to obtain advice about making a claim against the business directly through the courts.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we could not achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr and Mrs X. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and its decision does not cause Mr and Mrs X significant injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman