The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a councillor conduct complaint. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision.
The complaint
Mr X complained about the conduct of a councillor following comments they made about traffic on social media. He said the Councillor did not provide evidence to support his claims. He disagrees with the Council’s decision not to investigate his complaint. He wants the Councillor to retract his statement and apologise.
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 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, or 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 the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Council's Monitoring Officer is responsible for considering allegations that an elected member has breached the Members' Code 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.
The Monitoring Officer said they would not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the conversation he referred too had been removed from social media. Therefore, it was not in the public interest. They offered Mr X the opportunity to provide further evidence.
The Monitoring Officer has followed the Council’s procedure for considering Code of Conduct complaints. They have provided a clear reason for their decision. They have discretion to decide whether to investigate. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the complaint to justify our involvement.
In addition, we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by an organisation. There is nothing to suggest the Council’s actions have caused Mr X a significant injustice.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman