Summary: Mr X complained the Council unfairly rejected his application to hold a circus on its land and poor complaint handling. We found the Council was at fault because it did not respond to his complaint or several enquiries by us. This caused Mr X avoidable distress, time and trouble. To remedy this injustice, the Council has agreed to apologise, make a payment to Mr X and take action to improve its service. We did not find fault with the Council’s decision to refuse his application because it was entitled to decide not to host any large events on its land. We found no evidence of an inconsistent or discriminatory approach to circuses, as claimed by Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision to refuse his application to hold a circus on council land. Specifically, he complains about:

• being incorrectly told no applications to use Council land would be approved in 2024. He later found out a fun fair had been granted permission on two occasions. Mr X says this was discriminatory against circuses; and
• the Council’s failure to respond to his formal complaint.

2. He says this has caused frustration, time, trouble and inconvenience.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered evidence provided by Mr X and the Council as well as relevant law, policy and guidance.
6. Mr X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered all comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Relevant Council policies

Hiring of Council owned land

7. The Council owns several areas of land that are potentially available to hire to hold commercial events.
8. The Council’s website includes all relevant information including the open space hire terms and conditions and forms that applicants must complete.

The Council’s complaints procedure

9. This says complaints will be acknowledged within 5 working days and responded to within 20 working days, unless the matter is more complex.

What happened

10. Mr X operates a travelling circus. In January 2024, he applied to the Council to hold a circus on Council-owned land. He completed the online form.
11. In response, Mr X was told, “at the current time the Council is unable to commit to being able to accommodate a circus visit this year”. Mr X asked the Council to provide a reason for its decision. He was concerned the Council was treating circuses differently to other events. This was based on a conversation he had with a Council officer several years earlier.
12. The Council explained:

• the decision was because of unprecedented pressure on the Council’s budget;
• it had to focus on the provision of statutory services;
• there was no legal obligation on the Council to provide space for commercial events; and
• similar applications from funfairs and food festivals had also been refused.

13. In March 2024, Mr X found out a funfair was being held on council-owned land. This prompted him to a formal complaint because he felt this was evidence of the Council being biased against circuses. He did not receive a response, despite sending a reminder and resubmitting the complaint form. This lack of response prompted Mr X to bring his complaint to the Ombudsman in June 2024. The Ombudsman contacted the Council six times before receiving an acknowledgment in November 2024.
14. In response to the Ombudsman’s enquiries, the Council:

• provided more detail about why Mr X’s application was refused, that included information about parking and ground conditions;
• provided more detail about the Council’s budgetary position and the resources involved in hosting large events;
• clarified Mr X had been told the Council would not consider applications for large commercial events;
• confirmed the fun fairs identified by Mr X were small events held on a different site to that proposed by Mr X; and
• apologised for not responding to his complaint, caused by human error.

Analysis

15. I will deal with Mr X’s two areas of complaint below.

Decision to refuse Mr X’s application to hold an event on Council-owned land

16. We are not an appeal body and will not interfere with decisions that have followed the correct procedure. In this case I am satisfied that there was no fault with the Council’s decision making. I say this because:

• it promptly provided Mr X with a response to his application;
• it provided Mr X with a reason for its decision;
• there was no legal duty on the Council to approve the application. The Council has discretion about what events it will approve;
• the Council has provided a satisfactory explanation for Mr X’s concern about inconsistency; and
• I found no evidence of bias against circuses.

17. For these reasons, I am satisfied the Council was entitled to make the decision it did. The Ombudsman has no authority to interfere with this decision.

Complaint handling

18. Under the he Council’s complaint handling policy, Mr X expected to receive a response to the complaint he made on 14 March within 20 working days. The Council failed to respond at all, despite Mr X resubmitting the form and sending a reminder email. This was fault.
19. It was this lack of response that made him come to the Ombudsman. There was further fault when the Council failed to respond to six emails from the Ombudsman between June and November 2024. This reinforced Mr X’s understandable view that the Council did not take his complaint seriously. It is highly probable Mr X would have been satisfied with the Council’s more detailed explanation behind the Council’s decision. Had this response been provided at the right time, it may have avoided him bringing his complaint to us.
20. Overall, I am satisfied the Council’s poos complaint handling caused Mr X avoidable distress, time and trouble This injustice requires a remedy
21. The Council says the failure to respond to Mr X’s complaint was down to human error. While I accept this may account for earlier events, it does not explain the repeated failure to respond to so many emails from us over such a long period of time. This suggests a more systemic problem that requires action by the Council.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. Within four weeks from the date of my final decision, the Council has agreed to take the following action.
1. Apologise in writing to Mr X for the faults I have identified in its complaint handling.
2. Pay Mr X £100 as a symbolic payment to acknowledge his time and trouble dealing with the complaint.
3. Review what went wrong with the complaint handling in this case, including the failure to respond to the Ombudsman on several occasions. It should take action to ensure both complaints and Ombudsman enquiries are not overlooked in future.
23. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

24. I find fault causing injustice. The Council has agreed to action recommendations to remedy injustice to Mr X and take action to improve its service. On this basis, I have completed my investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman