Summary: The complainant says the Council ignored regulations in place during the COVID-19 outbreak and allowed an event to go ahead which he says breached the rules. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The level of injustice suffered by the complainant does not warrant an investigation. Nor is an investigation likely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mr X, says the Council allowed an event to take place in the town centre which breached the restrictions in place during the COVID-19 virus outbreak.
2. Mr X says he and other business owners may face further restrictions because of the Council’s actions.
3. He wants the Council to apologise and apply the rules correctly in future.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. This complaint involves events that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic. The Government introduced a range of new and frequently updated rules and guidance during this time. We can consider whether the Council followed the relevant legislation, guidance and our published “Good Administrative Practice during the response to COVID-19”.
5. 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information provided by Mr X and discussed his complaint with him.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X says he and other business owners complained to the Council about its decision to allow an outdoor public event to take place over the summer, despite restrictions in place during the COVID-19 virus.
8. The Council confirmed a local business development group promoted the event which took place outside. It said it considered a risk assessment provided by the event promoter which included suitable provision to reduce the spread of the virus. This included floor markings, seating arrangement and a staggered start to encourage social distancing.
9. In its response to Mr X’s complaint, the Council acknowledged that some people attending the event did not follow the rules. It says it will work with organisers of future events to improve this.
10. Mr X says that by allowing the event to take place, the Council has potentially allowed COVID-19 to spread. And, because of this he, and other business owners face further lockdown which will have severe impact on their livelihoods.
11. In assessing this complaint, I must consider whether there was fault by the Council and whether this has caused a significant and personal injustice. This means I must determine whether Mr X has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of the Council’s decision to allow the outdoor event to take place.
12. It appears the Council considered a risk assessment and decided it met the restrictions in place when the event took place. I accept that Mr X may have been upset to see people attending the event and breaching the social distancing restrictions. However, I do not consider that allowing this event to take place caused him to suffer any serious financial loss, harm, or distress.
13. Also, the event took place in August, this decision is written in November and the Government has introduced different restrictions to supress the spread of the COVID-19 virus. I do not consider that an investigation by the Ombudsman into the Council’s permission of an outdoor event 3 months ago, will lead to a different, worthwhile outcome. Mr X’s fear that the outdoor event would increase the virus and lead to further restrictions is speculative. It would not be practicable for us to investigate whether that event on its own directly caused any further restrictions.

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. We do not consider the Council’s actions caused Mr X a significant personal injustice. Nor is it likely that an investigation will lead to a different outcome.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman