Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s poor communication. This is because further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council ignored a significant number of contacts he made regarding his father, Mr Y. He said he was trying to contact the Council about a safeguarding matter and the Council caused significant distress to Mr Y and his family. He wants a meaningful apology, a financial remedy of £2500 and the Council to improve its service.

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 further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We will not usually investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34B(8))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said the Council ignored 23 communications within 34 days. In its response the Council said communication was impacted because it undertook a restructure of its senior management team. It apologised and said that the lack of response to Mr X’s communications was unacceptable.
7. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council accepted its lack of response to Mr X was unacceptable said and it had started a service review. It said it implemented enhanced monitoring and clearer accountability and escalation protocols. It also said it would implement a clear escalation pathway for non-response. The service improvements highlighted by the Council prevents recurrence of the issue Mr X experienced. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
8. Mr X said the Council’s complaint response was not substantive. The response provided by the Council addresses the complaint raised by Mr X. The Council admitted fault and explained how it will improve its service. There is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s complaint to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman