The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a decision to place a proposal on a committee meeting agenda and the Council’s complaint handling. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision. Nor do we consider Mr X has suffered sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement. Finally, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are not going to look at the issue which led to the original complaint.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council failed to follow its complaint policy. And deliberately misinterpreted his complaint to avoid an investigation.
He says this has caused a loss of trust in the Council and he has spent time and trouble pursuing his complaint.
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 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 continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are not going to look at the issue which led to the original complaint.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s responses.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained the Council broke a commitment made to residents concerning the linking of the health suite at the local pool to its leisure strategy. He also made numerous complaints relating to the same issue.
The Council failed to respond to Mr X according to its complaint procedure. It failed to advise Mr X that it would not meet the complaint policy deadlines and the final complaint was late.
Mr X says the Council deliberately misunderstood his complaint to avoid carrying out an investigation. The Council told Mr X his complaint is a disagreement with a lawful decision taken by a Council committee. As it is not a complaint about a service failure, his complaint cannot be considered under the Council’s complaints procedure and can only be considered by the courts.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. There is no evidence of fault in how the Council’s decision to place a proposal on a committee agenda.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his complaint. While we expect councils to follow their complaint procedures, we consider it is not a good use of funds to investigate complaint handling in isolation when we are not considering the substantive issues raised in a complaint. And, while I accept Mr X has spent time and trouble pursuing his complaint, we do not consider he has suffered sufficient significant personal injustice to warrant our involvement.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in its decision to place a proposal on a committee meeting agenda. Also, It is not a good use of public funds to investigate concerns about complaint handling alone. And we do not consider Mr X has suffered significant personal injustice which justifies investigating a complaint about the Council’s complaints handling.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman