The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to investigate a complaint that a Councillor breached the code of conduct. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the complaint to justify an investigation. Also, we will not investigate concerns about the Council’s complaint procedure. We do not consider the complainant has suffered significant personal injustice because of any administrative errors in the complaints process alone to warrant our involvement.
The complaint
XX complains the Council has failed to guarantee the Councillors meet the standards set out in its Code of Conduct.
They also complain one of its Officers was aggressive and intimidating and failed to take the complaint seriously.
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 XX and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
The Ombudsman does not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on councillor conduct complaints, but we can consider if there was fault in the way the council considered the complaint We will only investigate complaints if there is sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement, or we consider it is in the public interest to do so.
XX complained to the Council about the actions of a councillor.
Following the Council’s published procedure on dealing with complaints about the conduct of councillors, the complaint was passed to the Council’s Monitoring Officer or Deputy Monitoring Officer to assess.
The Officer decided the actions XX complained of were not carried out by the individual when acting in their capacity as Councillor. Therefore, the Code of Conduct did not apply, and the Council had no jurisdiction to consider the complaint.
This is a decision the Council is entitled to make. Without evidence of fault in the decision-making process the Ombudsman cannot question the decision. As stated above we are not an appeal service for councillor complaints.
XX also complains that a Council Officer failed to take the complaint seriously and her response was aggressive and intimidating. However, the Officer’s response was a factual reply to the concerns raised by XX.
I understand XX has concerns about the complaint procedure. However, we do not consider they have suffered a significant personal injustice from any administrative errors in the Council’s processing of the complaint alone to justify an investigation.
I understand XX has lost faith in local governance and that they find it uncomfortable to visit their local community. However, I do not consider this represents a level of personal injustice which warrants an Ombudsman investigation.
Final decision
We will not investigate XX’s complaint. We have not seen evidence to suggest fault in the way the Council’s decision that the Code of Conduct did not apply to the Councillors actions as described in XX’s complaint. Neither will we investigate the complaint about failures in the complaints process alone as we do not consider they have suffered sufficient injustice on this point alone to warrant our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman