The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to cancel a meeting, or allegations of defamation of character. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s cancellation of the meeting. And we cannot consider allegations of defamation, these are matters for the courts.
The complaint
Mrs X complains the Council defamed her husband’s character.
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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mrs X.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mrs X alleges the Council defamed her husband’s character. We will not investigate this as only the courts can consider such matters. Only the courts can decide whether a statement has caused serious harm to a person’s reputation which would render them liable to a claim for damages. The courts are better placed to consider a complaint about this and so we will not investigate.
The Council is entitled to act to protect its staff. In this case, the Council considered there was a risk of verbal confrontation at the meeting. Therefore, it made the decision to cancel the meeting. I understand Mrs X disagrees. I also acknowledge the Council may have misinterpreted the situation. However, it is entitled to cancel the meeting. It has apologised for any misunderstanding which I consider is an appropriate action.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we cannot consider her allegations of defamation – this is a matter for the courts. Nor have we seen evidence of fault in the Council’s decision to cancel a meeting.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman