The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a councillor conduct complaint as it does not cause the complainant sufficient injustice to warrant our further involvement.
The complaint
Mr X complained that a local councillor is standing for election to Parliament in a constituency which is 160 miles away from their Council ward. Mr X considers this shows the councillor has no interest in their ward issues and that they were elected on false promises. Mr X considers the Council did not properly assess his complaint about this conduct and that the decision not to investigate is wrong.
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 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.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I recognise that Mr X feels strongly about this matter, however he has not personally suffered a significant loss or harm as a result of the actions of the councillor or from how the Council dealt with his complaint. We have limited resources and must public money carefully. As such, we will not investigate this complaint.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice caused to him is not sufficient to justify our further involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman