The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how a Councillor handled his enquiries. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing Mr X a significant injustice.
The complaint
Mr X complains about how a Councillor responded to his enquiries about how the Council were handling his request for a banding review. He says that her response was disrespectful.
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.
(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 emailed a Councillor for help with how the Council was handling his banding review. He says her response was disrespectful.
The Council’s Monitoring Officer considered Mr X’s complaint and sought advice from the Independent Person in line with their policy. The Council said it found the Councillor had acted in line with the Code of Conduct.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council considered his complaint. Also, while Mr X found the Councillors email disrespectful, the Ombudsman must use public money carefully and I do not consider this caused him a significant enough injustice to justify an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault causing him a significant injustice.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman