The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about events that led to a leisure centre ban being issued. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains that he was not properly informed about the induction process at the Council’s leisure centres and that this led to an altercation with staff resulting in him being banned.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide: there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X had a membership which allowed him to use all the Council leisure centres in the area. The Council’s policy is that members will undergo an induction in each gym before they can use the facilities. Mr X says he was not told of this policy when he signed up and when he attended one of the centres this led to an altercation between, he and the staff there.
The manager subsequently wrote to Mr X to inform him that he was banned from the leisure centres for twelve months. This was because of Mr X’s conduct and language during the altercation.
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely, we would find fault with the Council. We are not an appeal body, and it is not my role to comment on Mr X’s conduct, say whether the ban should have been implemented, or decide whose version of events is correct.
I have considered if the Council properly considered Mr X’s appeal against the ban and his subsequent complaint. However, I have seen no evidence of fault. The Council and leisure centre gathered evidence from the people involved, including Mr X and considered the relevant policy and the terms and conditions of his membership. The fact that the Council did not uphold the complaint about the ban does not mean it has done anything wrong.
The Council did uphold Mr X’s complaint about information it provided to him about the induction process when he first signed up. It told Mr X that staff had been reminded about the importance of providing this information in future. I see nothing more that further investigation could achieve regarding this point.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman