Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has failed to carry out a standards enquiry into the actions of staff members, who are alleged to have knowingly supplied false information during planning enforcement and council tax liability appeals. The alleged failure to conduct an enquiry does not cause the complainant a significant personal injustice, and we cannot involve ourselves in such disciplinary matters.

The complaint

1. Mr X says the Council has failed to carry out a standards enquiry into staff members, who he believes were guilty of perverting the course of justice during planning enforcement action and council tax enforcement action which the Council took against him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We can 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. So, we do not start an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(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 Council, which included their complaint correspondence and an update on what has been happened since our related decision on one of Mr X’s previous complaints.
• the Ombudsman’s decisions on previous complaints from Mr X.
• the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In our decision on one of Mr X’s previous complaints, we explained the Planning Inspector is not within our jurisdiction, and that if Mr X believed council officers had provided false information during his appeal against a Listed Building enforcement notice, then it was open to him to pursue court action to challenge the Inspector’s decision. Similarly, we cannot interfere with the Valuation Tribunal Services decision on Mr X’s appeal against his Council Tax liability for the same building. Again, Mr X could pursue court action if he believes its decision was affected by the alleged false information.
5. The Ombudsman does not reconsider issues already addressed in response to a previous complaint. So, we will not now look at any parts of the complaint about how the alleged false information may have affected the planning enforcement and council tax appeal decisions.
6. As such, I do not see that any residual or separable, personal injustice (arising solely from the alleged failure to carry out a standards enquiry into the council officers’ actions) is so significant as to justify starting an investigation into this specific issue.
7. Furthermore, the Ombudsman cannot involve herself in internal disciplinary matters at councils, so we could not direct the Council to carry out the standards enquiry which Mr X thinks should have occurred.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the alleged fault has not caused him an injustice which is significant and separable to that previously considered by the Ombudsman, and we cannot involve ourselves in disciplinary matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman