he made against a councillor. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.
The complaint
The complainant, I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council dismissed her complaint that a Councillor breached the Code of Conduct because the councillor was not working in his official capacity. She says the Local Government Association guidance says the code of conduct applies when "Your actions would give the impression to a reasonable member of the public with knowledge of all the facts that you are acting as a councillor".
Mrs X says the Councillor identified himself as a councillor and therefore he was acting as a councillor. She also says she was not allowed to give evidence to support her complaint
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 Mrs X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X complained to the Council that a councillor had breached the Code of Conduct during the COVID-19 pandemic. She says the Councillor had identified himself as a councillor during an incident involving them both. Therefore, as he said he was a councillor, then he was acting as a councillor.
The complaint form completed by Mrs X says: “It is important that you provide all of the information you wish to have taken into account”.
The Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints about councillors does not contain any requirement for the Monitoring Officer to obtain further information from the complainant.
The Council’s Monitoring Officer (MO) responded to Mrs X’s complaint. Their response said they had considered Mrs X’s complaint in consultation with the Independent Person.
The information provided by Mrs X The Councillor’s response to the complainant and his wife’s supporting statement Legal precedent The MO decided the Code of Conduct was not engaged because the Councillor was at home with his wife at the time of the incident and not performing any functions of the Council. They confirmed the Council would not be taking any action.
The Ombudsman does not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on complaints about the conduct of members. But we can consider if there was fault in the way a council considered a complaint.
In this case, I have not seen any evidence of fault in how the Council considered Mrs X’s complaint. It followed the process set out in its procedure for dealing with complaints about councillors. It has explained its decision to her. I consider the Monitoring Officer’s response to Mrs X to provide a reasoned explanation of the decision reached. Without evidence of fault in the process the Council followed we have no powers to question the merits of the decision reached.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we have seen no evidence of fault in the way the Council considered her complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman