The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant remaining on hold for 40 minutes when he telephoned the Council. There is not enough injustice to justify an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Mr X, complains he was kept on hold for 40 minutes when calling the Council number to vote of a proposal to increase council tax.
He wants compensation.
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 effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X called the telephone number published by the Council to vote on a proposal to increase council tax.
He says a recorded message said he would be answered shortly. However, after 40 minutes he hung up.
The Council apologised. It says because of a technical error it could not access any of the calls in the queue. Calls could only be ended by the caller hanging up. It confirmed it is working with the telephony provided to prevent the problem from reoccurring.
Mr X wants compensation for spending 40 minutes waiting.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because, although it was inconvenient, we do not consider that he has suffered sufficient personal injustice to justify an Ombudsman investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman