The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a code of conduct complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, has complained about how the Council dealt with her complaint about the conduct of a parish councillor. Mrs X says she has received conflicting responses from the Council’s Monitoring Officer and the Independent Person was not consulted.
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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Local Authorities have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure that the authority, its officers and members maintain the highest standards of conduct. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are also unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the parish council or the councillor complained about. We can consider the Council’s administration of a code of conduct complaint. However, where a decision has been made in line with the correct procedure, taking account of the relevant evidence, the Ombudsman will generally not criticise the decision, even if the complainant does not agree with it.
In this case, I am satisfied the Monitoring Officer dealt with the matter in line with the Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints before deciding not to take further action. The Monitoring Officer wrote to Mrs X to acknowledge her complaint and outline the complaint process. In the letter, the Monitoring Officer said they were satisfied the councillor was acting in their capacity as a councillor at the time of the incident. The Monitoring Officer said they would contact the councillor for their comments before moving to the next stage of the process for code of conduct complaints.
Following this, the Monitoring Officer wrote to Mrs X and said no further action would be taken as the councillor was not acting in their capacity as a councillor at the time of the incident. I understand Mrs X disagrees and says the Monitoring Officer’s decision contradicts the initial complaint response she received. However, the Monitoring Officer has explained the change to their earlier response and why they consider the councillor complained about was not acting in their official capacity.
I understand Mrs X disagrees and says the Independent Person should have been consulted. But the Monitoring Officer was entitled to use their judgement to decide a formal investigation was not needed. The Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints also say the Monitoring Officer only needs to consult with the Independent Person if the complaint progresses to stage two. As the Monitoring Officer properly considered Mrs X’s concerns, in line with the Council’s criteria for code of conduct complaints, it is unlikely I could find fault.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman