The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We have not investigated this complaint about the decision to end an allotment tenancy. This is a late complaint and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
The complaint
Miss X complains about the decision to evict her from her allotment plot and that the Council failed to respond to her complaint about this. Miss X also complains that the allotment manager accused her of harassment.
Miss X says this has caused her to lose six months rent on her allotment, as well as stress and anxiety.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
It is our decision whether to start, and when to end an investigation into something the law allows us to investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended) We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended) It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.
How I considered this complaint
I have considered the information Miss X and the Council provided.
Miss X and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered these comments before making a final decision.
What I found
Miss X complained that an allotment association acting on behalf of the Council evicted her from her allotment plot. Miss X said she did not agree with this decision.
Miss X complained about this issue to the Council a year after she received the eviction notice. Miss X complained to us about this matter nine months later.
We will not investigate this complaint as it would have been reasonable for Miss X to have complained about these matters sooner. I have not seen any good reason to use my discretion to investigate.
I understand that Miss X disagrees with the decision to evict her, but that alone is not a reason for us to investigate. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong.
There is also no evidence of fault in the actions of the Council or allotment association about this matter and so we would not investigate.
Miss X also complained that the Council failed to respond to her complaint.
It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we do not investigate the substantive issue. Therefore, we will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint.
We also cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint the allotment manager accused her of harassment. This is because this is an allegation about a personal matter and not something done on the Council’s behalf.
Final decision
I have discontinued this investigation as it is a late complaint and there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman