Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a Council meeting concerning complaints about antisocial behaviour and a Freedom of Information request. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains about the conduct of two Council Officers who she says breached her human rights during a meeting about her complaint at the Council’s office in April 2025. The Officers were dealing with Freedom of Information (FOI) requests she made to the Council regarding drones and antisocial behaviour (ASB), as well as a complaint about reports of ASB. She says the Council breached the Human Rights Act 1998 and Equality Act 2010 by engaging in disability discrimination, as well as harassment, victimisation and a violation of her privacy rights.
2. Miss X complains about the Council’s complaints handling and its refusal to consider her complaint, which it decided was late.
3. She says she continues to deal with antisocial behaviour.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
6. 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

7. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
8. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about action taken by or on behalf of any local policing body in connection with the investigation or prevention of crime. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, Section 26, paragraph 2 as amended)
9. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

10. I considered information provided by the complainant.
11. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

12. Miss X’s complaint centres on a meeting held by the Council at its offices at the beginning of April 2025. This complaint is late because Miss X did not complain to the Ombudsman until late April 2026. I have seen no good reasons to investigate the complaint now.
13. In any event, if we were to exercise discretion on the lateness of Miss X’s complaint, we would not investigate the complaint. This is based on the following:

• the underlying reports of ASB happened earlier than April 2025, with some related CCTV footage allegedly documenting incidents in August and September 2024. Miss X could have contacted the Ombudsman much sooner to complain about the Council’s response to any historic reports of ASB. Or, Miss X could have asked someone else to complain on her behalf, such as the solicitor she had instructed or the charity that supported her because of her reports of ASB;
• part of Miss X’s complaint focuses on the actions of a Police Officer following reports of ASB and stalking. We cannot investigate any action by the Police in the investigation of a crime;
• Miss X was unhappy with the Officer’s response to her FOI request during the meeting. The Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) is best placed to consider FOI complaints. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to refer the matter to the ICO; and,
• the previous three bullet points explain the reasons why we would not investigate the substantive parts of Miss X’s complaint. It is not a good use of our limited resources to investigate the Council’s complaint handling alone when we are not investigating the substantive issues. This includes the Council’s communication with Miss X and consideration of any disabilities during the meeting about the complaint. This also applies to the Council’s response to Miss X’s complaint in April 2026. Any separable injustice is not significant enough to justify our further involvement.

14. So far as Miss X complains about more recent incidents of ASB, we will not investigate this complaint because it is premature. It is reasonable to expect Miss X to first complain to the Council about these matters. If Miss X remains unhappy with the Council’s response or any delays in the process, she may wish to then make a new complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint about a meeting held by the Council in connection with complaints about antisocial behaviour and a Freedom of Information request. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman