The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to follow its complaint procedure. Part of the complaint is late, and we have seen no reason to investigate the late issues now. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered a complaint that councillors had breached the code of conduct. Finally, we do not consider the complainant has suffered sufficient personal injustice from a failure to follow the complaint procedure alone to justify an investigation.
The complaint
Mx X complains the Council has ignored several of their letters which were sent to councillors and the Council. The correspondence is dated 2021/2022 and 2023. They also complain that the Council failed to respond to a complaint about failures to respond to correspondence.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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) 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mx X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The law says a complaint must be made to the Ombudsman within twelve months of a person becoming aware of the matter they are complaining about. I see no reason why Mx X could not have raised their concerns about issues arising before April 2023 with the Ombudsman much sooner. Therefore, we will not investigate the part of this complaint relating to issues occurring in 2021 and 2022.
Mx X complained councillors had failed to respond to their correspondence.
Local Authorities have a duty to appoint a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure 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 councillor complained about. 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 considered Mx X’s concerns and the evidence available and explained why they did not consider the code of conduct was engaged and that complaint will not be investigated.
I understand Mx X disagrees with the Monitoring Officer’s decision. But the Monitoring Officer is entitled to use their professional judgement to decide whether the Council’s code of conduct is engaged when consider a complaint that a councillor has breached that code. The Monitoring Officer properly considered Mx X’s concerns, explaining that councillors are not required or obliged to respond to emails and telephone calls from residents. As this is in line with the Council’s criteria for code of conduct complaints, it is unlikely I could find fault.
Finally, Mx X also complains the Council failed to follow its complaint procedure. While we expect councils to deal with complaints according to its published complaint procedure, however, we do not consider that a failure to do so causes a significant personal injustice which warrants an investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mx X’s complaint because: it is too late to consider complaints about events arising before April 2023 there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the council considered the complaint that councillors had breached the code of conduct by failing to respond to Mx X’s correspondence; and Mx X has not suffered sufficient personal injustice from a failure in the Council’s complaint procedure alone to justify an investigation.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman