Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the way the Council dealt with his reports of serious threats, intimidation and harassment. This is because it would be reasonable for him to use the community trigger process.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr B, complained about the way the Council dealt with his reports of serious threats, intimidation and harassment. Mr B told us he is living in fear.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, 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

3. I have considered the information Mr B provided. Mr B has had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B told us the Council has failed to follow its policy on hate incidents he reported. He said the Council refused to investigate properly his reports of abuse when he had obtained evidence over a long period. He said the Council has failed to use the powers it has to address what has happened. Also, he said the Council failed to help him with equipment for gathering evidence. Mr B has criticised what the Council said in its first stage complaint response about not being able to open a link to evidence he had sent, even though the police had been able to do so. However, in its final response to Mr B’s complaint the Council did refer to
   
   
   photographs and a video attached to the case. The Council said the case was still being investigated and it would continue to work with the police.
5. We must look at whether there is another body better placed to consider the issues Mr B has raised and whether it would be reasonable to expect him to ask for a review. If he has reported three separate incidents in the past six months to the council, police or social landlord and he feels the matter is still ongoing, he can request a community trigger review. This is a multi-agency case review of a case where a local threshold is met. The agencies involved have a duty to carry out a review. The aim of the process is to bring these agencies together to take a joined up, problem-solving approach to find a solution. A panel will review the case and determine if appropriate action is being taken to resolve anti-social behaviour. The panel can make recommendations to the responsible organisation to improve the situation. 
6. We can consider complaints about administrative fault by councils. We cannot consider complaints about the police. In this case it is reasonable to expect Mr B to use the community trigger process. That is because all of the agencies involved would take part in it and, importantly, it uses a problem-solving approach.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it would be reasonable for Mr B to use the community trigger process.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman