The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Authority’s provision of goods and services under an agreement. This is because the courts are better placed to consider disputes of a contractual nature.
The complaint
Ms X complains the Authority breached the terms of a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”), including a failure to provide core infrastructure, proper staffing or management support in the delivery of a project. She is also unhappy with its handling of her complaints.
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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Ms X and the Authority are in dispute over whether the MOU created legally binding obligations between them. Ms X considers it did, that the Authority breached this agreement and that it is liable to pay compensation.
It is not within my remit to decide on the interpretation of the MOU or whether it should be considered a legally binding agreement. I therefore cannot consider whether the Authority is liable to pay compensation for any alleged breach of this agreement. The courts are better placed to decide on disputes of a contractual nature.
It is not proportionate to investigate Ms X’s complaints about the Authority’s complaint handling when we are not investigating the substantive issue.
Final decision
We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because the courts are better placed.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman