Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s health and safety investigation after his wife was involved in an accident at work. This is because the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice, and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about a health and safety investigation carried out by the Council after his wife was involved in an accident at work. Mr X complains the Council missed Health and Safety Executive Guidelines during its investigation. He is unhappy the Council did not prosecute his wife’s employer. Mr X says if the Council had properly investigated, his wife’s employer would have reacted differently following the accident.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• 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

4. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. The events at the heart of Mr X’s complaint took place in 2015. The Ombudsman normally expects people to complain to us within twelve months of them becoming aware of a problem. We look at each complaint individually, and on its merits, considering the circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are good reasons to do so. I do not consider that to be the case here. I see no reason Mr X could not have complained much earlier. The exception at paragraph 2 therefore applies to his complaint and the Ombudsman will not investigate. In reaching this decision I have taken into account the points I make below.
6. As explained in paragraph 3, when the Ombudsman investigates, we look for fault causing injustice. Mr X is clearly unhappy with the Council’s investigation into his wife’s accident. But the Council only became involved after Mr X’s wife was injured at work. Even if there were faults or flaws in the Council’s investigation, they will not have caused Mr X or his wife any significant personal injustice. It is also unlikely we would question the professional judgment of the Council officer involved. We could also never say with certainty a different finding by the Council would have affected how Mrs X’s employer reacted after the accident. So, even if the complaint was not late, an investigation by the Ombudsman would not be appropriate.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the complaint is late, there is not enough evidence of fault causing injustice, and it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman