The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to continue to treat Mr X as a vexatious complainant. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.
The complaint
Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to treat him as a vexatious complainant and restrict his contact with officers and councillors to a single point of contact (SPOC).
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 do not start an investigation if we decide 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 Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Due to the volume and nature of Mr X’s contact with the Council, it warned him that if he did not modify his contact with officers it would consider implementing its vexatious complainant policy. Mr X chose not to change his contact with officers. The Council decided to consider him a vexatious complainant. It gave him a SPOC and told him he could appeal against the decision. .
Mr X appealed, the Council reviewed the situation and upheld the decision. It explained its reasons and advised Mr X it would review the situation in twelve months.
Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. He wants it to withdraw the SPOC arrangements and apologise to him. However, as we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council sufficient to warrant an investigation, we will not investigate the complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman