Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X and Mr Y’s complaint about the way the Council approaches and responds to unauthorised traveller encampments in its area. The matters complained of are broad and general. There is no direct link between the faults claimed and any significant personal injustice to Ms X or Mr Y. The complaint is a campaign for change, best suited to representations to their local elected Members or MP.

The complaint

1. Ms X and Mr Y’s complaint is about the way the Council deals with unauthorised encampments of travellers in its area. They complain the Council has failed to:
1. follow government guidelines on the legal powers it should use to deal with unauthorised encampments in its area;
2. adopt a proactive strategy, in line with government guidance, to deal with unauthorised encampments;
3. provide a temporary travellers’ site after identifying the need for one over five years ago;
4. take into account the views of settled residents when deciding how to deal with the unauthorised encampments;
5. use its anti-social behaviour (ASB) powers in response to incidents caused by those on the encampments;
6. make and keep proper records of encampment incidents, reported crime or ASB, travellers’ welfare checks, and the financial impact of encampments on residents and the local economy.
2. Ms X and Mr Y say the Council’s approach to the issue has resulted in:
• negative impacts on residents and some travellers;
• unacceptable tolerance of exploitation of settled residents by some travellers;
• negative impacts on the tourist trade;
• increased perception by settled residents of the travelling community as all causing problems, leading to an ‘incitement of racism’.
3. Ms X and Mr Y want the Council, when dealing with the encampments, to:
• consider the human rights of people affected;
• take account of the impact on the tourist industry;
• vary the enforcement powers it uses to suit each incident; and
• take account of and follow the relevant national government guidance.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. As part of my assessment I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Ms X and Mr Y;
• issued a draft decision, inviting Ms X and Mr Y to reply, and considered comments received.
6. Ms X and Mr Y originally complained on behalf of a local community group, of which they are both members. The group is represented on local public service bodies, including the Council’s Strategic Partnership. But the Ombudsman could not positively find the community group was itself a body constituted for public service. Such a finding would have resulted in the complaint being outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction, because he cannot investigate complaints from public bodies.
7. I have considered this complaint as being received from Ms X and Mr Y, acting as private individuals, not in their capacities as members of the community group.

Back to top

What I found

8. The Ombudsman’s remit is to investigate allegations of council fault leading to significant personal injustice. There must be a direct causal link between the alleged fault and the claimed injustice.
9. The complaint issues here are broad ones about the way the Council deals with unauthorised traveller encampments, and Ms X and Mr Y’s dissatisfaction with its approach. They are not complaints about specific incidents relating to an encampment, where someone has asked the Council for a service, and there is an allegation of fault in that service which leads directly to a significant claimed injustice to Ms X or Mr Y. There is not enough evidence of a direct link between the claimed faults and injustices here.
10. Ms X and Mr Y’s complaint is a campaign, seeking change in the Council’s general approach to unauthorised encampments, which they consider would benefit the local community. These matters are not suited to the Ombudsman’s remit to investigate fault directly causing significant personal injustice. Ms X and Mr Y may wish to consider referring their concerns to the local elected Council Members, or the local MP.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because:

• there is not enough evidence of a direct link between the claimed faults and injustices; and
• the complaint is a campaign for change in the Council’s general policies and procedures, not one of specific Council fault leading to significant personal injustice to the complainants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman