Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

London Borough of Croydon

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-002-821 Sector Other Categories Category Councillor Conduct And Standards Decided 30 July 2025

View London Borough of Croydon scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the conduct of her local Councillor. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

The complaint

Ms X is unhappy with the conduct of her local Councillor and the overall management of the Council.

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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Ms X complained to the Council about the conduct of a local Councillor and was also unhappy with the way the Council is managed.

The Council wrote to Ms X to explain the procedure for investigating complaints about Councillor conduct and requested further information. Ms X did provide the information, so the Council could not take her complaint further.

Final decision

We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify further investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving London Borough of Croydon

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-016-038 Other
24-021-334 Upheld
25-016-072 Other
25-029-891 Other
25-005-953 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation