The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s non-statutory public budget consultation because there is insufficient evidence of fault and no worthwhile outcome achievable to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the Council’s non-statutory public consultation regarding its budget for the year 2024/25. Mr X said the consultation included non-statutory service areas and was misleading.
Mr X said the matter has caused him frustration and uncertainty.
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: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained about the Council’s public non-statutory budget consultation conducted in December 2023 to January 2024. Mr X said the consultation included statutory services alongside non-statutory services, which he said was misleading.
The Council responded to Mr X and explained the non-statutory budget consultation was to gather views informally about its budget to help inform later, statutory consultations. It apologised and agreed the title of the consultation could have been clearer.
Analysis We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not sufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman, and an investigation would not achieve a different outcome.
The title of the consultation, “non-statutory consultation”, was a reference to the Council conducting an informal consultation, not a consultation about non-statutory Council services. Therefore, there is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice to warrant an investigation by us. In addition, the Council accepted the title of the consultation was ambiguous and apologised to Mr X, therefore an investigation by the Ombudsman would not achieve any additional outcome.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because insufficient evidence of fault and no worthwhile outcome achievable to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman