The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: Miss X complains the Council failed to properly investigate her complaint about a Parish Councillor. We find fault with the Council for delay, failing to investigate the complaint in line with its procedure, and failing to communicate with Miss X. We have agreed remedies for the distress and frustration caused to Miss X.
The complaint
Miss X complains the Council failed to properly consider or investigate her Code of Conduct complaint about a member.
Miss X says the Council’s inaction in dealing with it has caused her distress and frustration.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended) If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I spoke with Miss X and considered the information she provided.
I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
Miss X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments received before making a final decision.
What I found
Legal and administrative background Council’s councillor complaint process The Localism Act 2011 requires all councils to adopt a Code of Conduct dealing with the conduct expected of elected members acting in their official capacity.
The guidance says after a complaint is received by the monitoring officer, the Council will acknowledge the complaint within 10 days by email or letter and write to the councillor complained about to let them know a complaint has been made against them and by whom.
When a complaint against a councillor is received, the monitoring officer assesses it, in consultation with an Independent Person, and considers the appropriate way to deal with it. An Independent Person is someone the Council is required to appoint to help deal with complaints.
This assessment can decide the appropriate way to deal with the complaint. The assessment can involve the following options: no further action; investigation by the officer to see whether the conduct amounts to a breach; other action, for example, informal resolution (such as an apology); referring the complaint for independent investigation.
At the assessment stage, the officer is trying to ascertain what behaviour is complained about, what part of the Code is breached, what evidence there is to support the complaint, and whether there is a straightforward way to resolve it. The Council’s procedure is to make this decision within two calendar months.
What happened On 1 June 2022 Miss X made a complaint to the monitoring officer (the “officer”) about the behaviour of a member.
The officer’s report shows that she sent the complaint to the Independent Person to assess on 9 June. The Independent Person confirmed the complaint should advance to investigation on 14 June.
On 21 June the officer then sent the complaint to the Councillor and got his response in July. The officer tried to get witness statements, but some wanted to remain anonymous.
At the end of August the Independent Person said this should go forward to a Standards Subcommittee hearing.
Miss X says the officer told her the Councillor had lodged his statement and the committee meeting hearing would be on 29 March 2023.
Miss X chased an update in April and the Council told her it had adjourned the hearing as there were no witnesses prepared to make a supporting statement.
Miss X had provided details of three witnesses and says the officer had not contacted them. She says the officer assured her she would contact them before Easter (March 2023).
In response to our enquiries the Council said the meeting was adjourned because the officer had failed to follow the correct procedure. There was evidence of a failure to comply with the Code of Conduct.
It also said in the report the officer apologised for the delay in bringing the matter to the attention of the Standards Subcommittee. This was because of time taken to contact witnesses, her large workload and she had been on a leave of absence.
Following the adjournment the Council says there was a further delay in completing the procedures and reassessing the claim.
Miss X sent a formal complaint to the Council in June 2023, a year after her original complaint.
The Council’s response said it could not deal with her complaint through its complaint process. This was because it was a standards complaint, and the complaint about the staff conduct related to an officer who had since left the Council.
The Council wrote to Miss X in August after she brought her complaint to the Ombudsman. It said it would review and progress the matter and hoped to get back to her by the end of the month.
Miss X has still not heard anything further from the Council.
In response to our enquires the Council said it could not locate any correspondence from its former officer, and had no record of a complaint response being sent to Miss X.
Analysis The Council accepted it failed to comply with the procedure above when it had evidence of a breach of the Code of Conduct. This is fault causing distress and frustration to Miss X, and was a lost opportunity to have the matter properly considered under the Code.
There was a delay between August 2022 and the hearing in March 2023. This is fault by the Council causing distress and frustration to Miss X.
Miss X says the Council did not contact her witnesses. The officer’s report said some witnesses wanted to remain anonymous. However the Council has no records other than the report from the officer. This is fault by the Council as we expect it to keep records following the Ombudsman’s Principles of Good Administrative Practice.
Recommended action Within one month of the final decision, the Council should: Write a personalised apology to Miss X for the fault identified above. We publish guidance on remedies which sets out our expectations for how organisations should apologise effectively to remedy injustice. The Council should consider this guidance in making the apology I have recommended in my findings.
Pay Miss X £250 made up of: £150 to acknowledge her avoidable distress, frustration and uncertainty; and £100 for the time and trouble of chasing her complaint.
Remind relevant officers about the importance of keeping contemporaneous notes about the investigation of complaints about members' conduct; Complete the final assessment of Miss X’s original complaint about the conduct of a member. If Miss X remains unsatisfied she can bring a further complaint to the Ombudsman.
The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.
Final decision
I find faut with the Council for failing to properly investigate Miss X’s complaint. We have agreed a symbolic payment, apology and for the Council to complete its investigation of her conduct complaint.
Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman