The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response time in dealing with Mr X’s correspondence about compensation. The substantive matter relates to alleged illegal detention in a secure children’s home. We decided in case 22 016 477 Mr X had a right to go to court it would be reasonable to use to seek a finding that he had been illegally detained. It follows that Mr X’s subsequent correspondence with the Council about compensation for the alleged illegal detention is also a matter closely linked to the alleged illegal detention. Mr X has a right to go to court about this matter it would be reasonable to use.
The complaint
Mr X said the Council has taken too long to respond to his complaint.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X’s complaint concerns his wish to be compensated for an alleged illegal detention in a secure children’s home. In case 22 016 477, we found Mr X had a right to go to court it would be reasonable to use as only a court could rule on the legality of the detention. His pursuit of the matter with the Council’s legal department is a closely related matter.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the matter he complains of is closely linked to a matter about which he has a right to go to court it would be reasonable to use.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman