Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

Tewkesbury Borough Council

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 25-008-937 Sector Environment And Regulation Category Antisocial Behaviour Decided 18 November 2025

View Tewkesbury Borough Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to issue him with a community protection warning. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation.

The complaint

Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to issue him with a community protection warning. He says the warning is unjustified and has caused distress. He wants the Council to remove the community protection warning.

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)) We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

In its complaint response, the Council explained to Mr X how it had reached its decision to issue him with a community protection warning. It said it had attempted to resolve the matter with him more informally, but he had declined to meet with officers. It said as part of its decision making it had considered CCTV, witness statements and evidence from relevant organisations. It was satisfied that its decision to issue him with the warning was appropriate.

The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.

We will not investigate this complaint. The Council appears to have appropriately considered the matter before reaching its decision to issue the community protection warning to Mr X. Although I accept Mr X does not agree with its decision, there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it considered the matter, so we cannot question the outcome.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving Tewkesbury Borough Council

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-012-806 06 Jan 2026 Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council failing to maintain the area outside her flat where … Other
24-013-686 27 Aug 2025 Summary: Miss B complained the Council had failed to resolve a long-standing noise nuisance caused to her by a neighbouring … Upheld
25-001-478 18 May 2025 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a breach of planning control. This is … Other
24-020-540 07 May 2025 Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint the Council failed to properly consider her request for a referral to … Other
24-005-321 13 Aug 2024 Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a planning application and a possible breach … Other
View all decisions for this organisation