The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council has dealt with the lease for a café near Mr X’s home and his subsequent complaints. We do not consider that an investigation will lead to a different outcome, and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking. Mr X also complains the Council has failed to provide him with information he has asked for. It is reasonable to expect him to ask the Information Commissioner’s Officer to consider this matter.
The complaint
Mr X complains the Council: allowed a café near his home to open without disabled access failed to ensure the work carried out at the café complies with building regulations has failed to answer his questions; and failed to deal with his complaints correctly
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: further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I will consider Mr X’s concerns in turn.
Mr X says the café has traded since April 2023 without a formal, signed lease agreement. I will not investigate this point as I do not consider Mr X has suffered a significant personal injustice because of this.
I understand the café opened before installing a ramp to provide access for disabled users. However, the Council says installation of a ramp has commenced. Therefore, I do not consider further investigation would lead to a different outcome.
The Council granted planning permission for refurbishment of the café in June 2023. Therefore, I do not consider further investigation would lead to a different outcome.
Mr X says he does not feel safe using the café as the Council does not know whether the work completed by the leaseholder complies with building regulations. However, the Council has received a building regulations application to regularise the works. It has yet to make a decision on this application. However, it is for the Council to make a decision on the application and further investigation will not lead to a different outcome.
Mr X wants specific members of the Council’s staff to be banned for dealing with matters concerning the café. We cannot achieve this outcome as the law prevents the Ombudsman from involvement in personnel matters.
I understand Mr X says the Council has not provided him with all the information he has asked for. If he believes the Council is withholding information it is reasonable to expect him to ask the Information Commissioner’s Officer to consider this point.
Mr X says the Council has failed to deal with his complaints according to its complaint procedure.
Final decision
We will not investigate because: we do not consider he suffered significant personal injustice because the café opened without a signed, formal lease agreement further investigations into complaints about alleged breaches of planning permission and building regulations will not lead to a different outcome it is reasonable to expect Mr X to raise his concerns about withholding information with the Information Commissioner’s Office we cannot require the Council to remove named officers from dealing with matters relating to the café; and there is not enough evidence of failure to follow the complaint procedure to justify investigating this point.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman