Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to prosecute a builder under its Trading Standards function. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council has declined to take any formal action against a rogue builder who left his home in a dangerous state. He disputes the Council’s decision that prosecution is not in the public interest and is unhappy with the time taken to reach the decision. He says he and his family have lived in a building site for more than a year and have suffered emotional and financial stress as a result of the actions of the builder.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council has explained the reasons it has decided not to prosecute the builder and I have seen no basis for us to question its decision. The Council’s approach is based on legal advice the Council has received and we cannot say it must take further action against the builder contrary to this advice.
5. Any prosecution by the Council would not in any event had achieved a remedy for the injustice Mr X claims. This is because the injustice stems from the actions of the builder, rather than the Council, and Trading Standards cannot force the builder to put right the work or pay Mr X compensation.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X by investigating further.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman