Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s delay in processing her information leading to unnecessary enforcement action. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council’s delay in processing information led to unnecessary enforcement action. She says this caused financial difficulty and distress.

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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X complains the Council’s delay in processing her information led to unnecessary enforcement action. The Council says that on two occasions it took around two weeks to process information Miss X provided. It apologised and explained it did not take recovery action during this time.
6. I will not investigate this complaint. From the information available the Council’s delay has not caused injustice significant enough to justify an investigation. The Council has apologised for the delay and explained that no enforcement action happened because of it.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman