Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled his case and did not investigate his complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council refused to investigate his complaint due to it being late. He states the Council did not therefore provide a response to his concerns including that it:
• Fabricated allegations against him
• Misused legal proceedings; and,
• Colluded with the police.

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 (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. While Mr X’s complaint focuses on the Council’s refusal to investigate his complaint it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Councils complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. This is because any fault by the Council in dealing with Mr X’s complaint did not by itself cause him significant injustice. We must therefore consider the substance of his complaint and decide whether there are grounds to investigate these issues.
8. Mr X believes the Council fabricated allegations against him several years ago, although he has only recently become aware of the allegations through his daughter’s ‘subject access request’. But we could not prove the Council fabricated the allegations and it would not be fault to investigate any allegations made.  
9. Mr X states the Council colluded with the police as there were logs between them. It is normal for the police to be present in multi-agency meetings, and we would not criticise the Council for this.
10. Mr X also complains about a Recovery Order, which he says continued for longer than it should have. This is a court order, so we cannot comment on this. Mr X should raise any concerns around this order with the court.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault, and as we are not looking at the substantive issue, we will not look at the Council’s handling of his complaint in isolation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman