Background
The Local Government Act 1974 established the Local Government Ombudsmen (LGOs) for England and for Wales. Wales is now covered by the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales.
The three Ombudsmen in England each deal with complaints from different areas of the country, and allocate the areas between them so that each handles roughly the same number of complaints each year.
The legal framework
- The Local Government Act 1974
- Regulatory Reform (Collaboration etc between Ombudsmen) Order 2007
- The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007
(You can find these Acts on the UK Statute Database, and the Regulatory Reform order on the Office of Public Sector Information website - see links in box on right hand side of this page.)
The Local Government Act 1974 defines two main statutory functions for the Ombudsmen:
- to investigate complaints against councils and some other authorities
- to provide advice and guidance on good administrative practice
The main activity is the investigation of complaints, which the Act states is limited to complaints from members of the public alleging they have suffered injustice as a result of maladministration. Since 1988, members of the public have been able to complain on their own behalf. There is no need for them to be referred by a councillor (when that restriction was removed, the number of complaints received by the Ombudsmen went up by over 44% in the first year).
The Ombudsmen's jurisdiction covers all local authorities (excluding town and parish councils); police authorities; school admission appeal panels; and a range of other bodies providing local services [see Making a complaint for a full list of authorities within jurisdiction]. The vast majority of the complaints the Ombudsmen receive concern the actions of local authorities and that is why they are known as the Local Government Ombudsmen. The Act also refers to limits on the Ombudsmen’s jurisdiction [see Guide for Advisers for details].
Despite these restrictions, most of the administrative actions of local authorities are within the Local Government Ombudsmen's jurisdiction.
All the powers of investigation are vested in each of the Ombudsmen personally. The Ombudsmen are equal in status and none has power to review the decisions of another.
On 1 August 2007 the Regulatory Reform (Collaboration etc between Ombudsmen) Order 2007 came into force. In broad terms the Order enables the Local Government Ombudsmen for England, the Parliamentary Ombudsman and the Health Service Ombudsman for England to work together collaboratively on cases and issues that are relevant to more than one of their individual jurisdictions. Examples of complaints that may fall within this category include the provision of health and social care; complaints about the administration of housing and welfare benefits; and complaints about some planning and environmental issues.
The Local Government and Public Involvement in Health Act 2007, which came into effect on 1 April 2008, introduced more changes to the Ombudsmen’s jurisdiction and operation. The main changes are:
- the Ombudsmen may look at service failure in addition to maladministration
- the Ombudsmen will have a limited power to investigate where an apparent case of maladministration comes to light even though they have received no complaint about the matter
- complaints about the procurement of goods and services are now within jurisdiction
- the Ombudsmen may issue a ‘statement of reasons’ instead of a report if they are satisfied with the council’s proposals to remedy its failures
- there are new powers to publish Ombudsmen’s decisions other than reports
- complaints no longer need to be in writing.
Back to top
In 1961, Justice published a report called The Citizen and the Administration: the Redress of Grievances (the Whyatt Report). The report distinguished between:
- complaints by a citizen about a decision affecting him or her that was alleged to be wrong on its merits; and
- complaints of maladministration.
The Whyatt Report suggested the setting up of a ‘General Tribunal’ to deal with miscellaneous appeals from discretionary decisions which were alleged to be wrong on merits. The report also recommended the establishment of an institution, along the lines of the Scandinavian ombudsmen, to be called the ‘Parliamentary Commissioner’ and deal with complaints of maladministration.
The Conservative Government of the day was attracted by neither of these proposals. But the Labour Government elected in 1964 came to office pledged to create a Parliamentary Commissioner but without any commitment to create a ‘General Tribunal’.
The Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967 created the first British ombudsman. Key points to note about the 1967 Act are:
- access to the Parliamentary Commissioner (PCA) is only through an MP
- the PCA provides a report on a complaint to the MP who referred it
- the PCA is concerned solely with whether there has been injustice as a consequence of maladministration by, or on behalf of, a Government department (and certain other bodies) and is not concerned with the merits of decisions taken without maladministration
- the PCA may make recommendations but they are not binding
- the PCA may not conduct an investigation on his or her own initiative
- the PCA may not investigate a matter if a remedy for it has been or may be sought by means of an appeal to a tribunal or through the courts.
The 1967 Act did not meet with universal acclaim. For example, some MPs feared that the PCA would weaken their traditional role of obtaining redress for constituents' grievances. Other MPs and commentators thought that the PCA would be so toothless as to be of no value.
But in fact the PCA quickly won the confidence of the House of Commons and of Whitehall. So much so that it was soon accepted that a similar system of redress would be appropriate for other parts of the public sector. Legislation to do this was introduced:
- in 1973, to create the Health Service Commissioners for England, Scotland and Wales (in the event, all three offices were held by the PCA of the day until the devolution of Scotland and Wales)
- in 1974 to create the Local Government Ombudsmen (formally, the Local Commissioners for Administration) for England and Wales
- in 1975 to create a Local Government Ombudsman for Scotland, and
- similar arrangements for the public sector in Northern Ireland.
All of these newer ombudsman schemes were modelled, to a greater or lesser extent, on the Parliamentary Commissioner Act 1967.
It was not long before the private sector began to think that it, too, needed ombudsmen. During the 1980s and 1990s, there was an explosion of ombudsman schemes. Some of them have a statutory basis, others are purely contractual. These include the ombudsmen for Financial Services, Estate Agents, Legal Services and Pensions. The private sector schemes, however, differ in some important respects from those for the public sector. For example, the private sector schemes are usually seen as a direct alternative to the courts, so the fact that a complainant could seek redress through the courts is not an obstacle to the ombudsman investigating. Also, in the contractual schemes, the ombudsman's decision is binding on the body against which the complaint has been made. And in some private sector schemes, the ombudsman may look at the merits of a decision (was it 'fair and reasonable'?) as well as the way in which it was taken.
Back to top
Date Updated: 16/01/09