The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a school refurbishment. This is because we have decided any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
The complaint
Mrs X complains the Council failed to properly manage the refurbishment of a school for multi-use occupation. Mrs X says that while this did not impact on her personally, the community has been left feeling let down.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
People may complain to us about injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ by a public organisation we could investigate (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1) or section 34C(1)(a)).
We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), or section 34B(8)).
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The law means we can choose only to investigate a complaint where the person has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the body complained about. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged personal loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
I recognise Mrs X’s concerns about the management of the project, but this is not a significant enough injustice to warrant us investigating.
Additionally, Mrs X can raise her concerns about the financial aspects of the project management with the Council’s independent auditor, who ensures proper legal compliance and financial management.
Final decision
We will not investigate this complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman