Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a health and safety at work incident. That is because the complaint is late.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to investigate whether his previous employer (the Company) had complied with the Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations 2013. He said the Council’s failure to investigate had affected legal proceedings he was taking against the Company. He wants the Council to investigate the incident that occurred and if the Company followed the correct regulations.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:
• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X was involved in an accident at work in 2016. He reported the incident to the Council in 2016 and 2019. He complained to the Council in 2022 about the Council’s lack of investigation into the incident.
8. In response, the Council said the Primary Authority (the authority responsible for providing Health and Safety advice to the Company) had contacted the Company about the incident, and the information provided indicated it was not reportable. The Council said Mr X’s version of events contradicted the Company’s records. It said the contradictory information alongside the time that had passed since the incident, meant it was incredibly difficult to investigate his allegations further. It said it was satisfied the Company has RIDDOR procedures in place including an online reporting system to monitor the follow up of any incidents. Mr X was unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late. We have discretion to set aside this restriction where there are good reasons. However, I have decided not to exercise discretion because it was reasonable for Mr X to complain to us sooner. Mr X knew about the incident in 2016. He reported it further to the Council in 2019. If he was unhappy about how the Council responded to that report he could of complained to us sooner.
10. In any event if this complaint was not late, we would not investigate. The Council has considered the information provided by Mr X and the Company’s records of the incident. It has determined the incident was not reportable. Although Mr X disagrees with the Company’s version of events, the Council has said it will not investigate this further because of the time that has passed. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council investigated the incident or made that decision to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman