The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a complaint made against Mr X by a neighbour. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of a report made against him by a neighbour which he says was inaccurate and vexatious. He says the Council should provide him with the information he has requested about the report and that it should contact the neighbour about it.
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 X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.
My assessment
A neighbour, with whom Mr X has had problems for some time, complained about him to the Council.
Following normal procedures which require the Council to make contact with the person alleged to be causing a problem, an officer visited Mr X.
Mr X complained about this visit and the behaviour of the officer. The Council confirmed it would review the CCTV footage Mr X said he had of the visit if he sent it in. It explained it could not compel the person who had made the complaint against Mr X to apologise but it told him that if he thought the actions of the neighbour were repeated and malicious, he could complain about harassment and gave him information about this.
The Council confirmed it would deal with Mr X’s request for information as a Subject Access Request.
In accordance with its procedures, when the Council received the complaint from the neighbour it was obliged to investigate it. At the point of initial contact with the person complained about, the Council does not know if the allegation is true or not. The Council received a report and followed its procedures in contacting Mr X about the complaint. This is not evidence of fault, regardless of whether the complaint is subsequently shown to be without a factual basis.
Mr X complained about the behaviour of the officer. He was invited to send in the CCTV he said he had. If he does this the Council can view it and take whatever action it thinks is appropriate.
Mr X’s request for information was dealt with by the Council as an SAR request. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection as this is the body best place to deal with it.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman