Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with Temporary Events Notices. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how the Council has dealt with his concerns about licenced events at a property which I will call Property A. Mr X says that the Council accepted too many Temporary Events Notices (TENs), failed to investigate reports that alcohol has been sold without a TEN and failed to publish information about TENs on its website.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Property A’s owner, Mr A, submits Temporary Events Notices (TENs) to the Council to carry out the licenced activity of selling alcohol on his premises.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council allowed too many TENs from Mr A. The Council accepted it allowed too many TENs previously, because applications were not always made from the same person and so were not linked. It has written to the applicants informing them that in future only a maximum of five TENs will be accepted per year. This a proportionate and appropriate response and we could therefore not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.
8. We could also not add to the Council’s investigation into how it published information about TENs. There is no duty for Council’s to publish a register of TENs online and so we cannot find it at fault for not doing so. The Council has however said that it plans to add this to its website as part of a long-term project. It has also provided Mr X with copies of information he requested.
9. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council failed to act on his reports that alcohol was sold at Property A without a TEN. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with the matter. It considered Mr X’s concerns and information Mr X had obtained from social media, but concluded that there was insufficient evidence that a breach had taken place. In the absence of fault, we cannot question the merits of the Council’s decision that there was insufficient evidence a breach had taken place. Whilst Mr X strongly disagrees with the Council this does not mean it has done anything wrong. I do note that the Council has written Mr A and reminded him that alcohol must not be sold without a TEN.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman