Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council dealt with Mr B’s concerns relating to an email sent by a third-party who used a Council’s officer’s name as a cosignatory. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr B wants.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about an email a third-party sent to different recipients about the care of his son and then signed off the email using their name and a Council's officer name. Mr B says the Council has not properly dealt with the matter or taken his concerns seriously. He says the Council’s failure to address the issue has impacted on his mental health. As an outcome he wants the Council to respond to the email and tell all recipients the email did not originate from the Council officer and confirm the officer was not consulted by the sender.

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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, 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 the complainant including the Council’s response to his complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. We will not investigate this complaint as there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. When the Council responded to Mr B’s complaint it confirmed the email was not sent jointly by its officer and was solely written by the sender. It said its officer would not reply directly to all recipients in the email, but Mr B could share the outcome of its complaint investigation with the sender.
6. The Council said Mr B could reply to the email if he wanted to clarify the position. We could not add to the Council’s complaint investigation, and we cannot achieve the outcome Mr B wants.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify starting an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman