Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered an application for a license for a music event. We have not seen evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application. Nor have we seen evidence the Council called the complainant incompetent. Finally, we cannot consider allegations of defamation as this is a matter for the courts.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains a Council Officer was unprofessional and defamed her character. She says they
• asked for her qualifications multiple times
• branded her incompetent and influenced others to make the same judgement
• refused to deal with her personally; and
• humiliated her in public meetings
2. Miss X also says the person who investigated her complaint was biased against her and failed to take her concerns seriously.
3. Miss X wants a personal, written apology from the Officer, a meeting to correct matters and a different Officer assigned to the licence application.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. 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, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council received an application for a license for a music festival. The Council must ensure that duty holders detailed in the application manage and control risk effectively. Regulation seven of the Health and Safety as Work Regulations 1999 states:

“employers must appoint a Competent Person to enable them to meet their health and safety obligations; a Competent Person being someone who has sufficient training and experience or knowledge and other qualities that allow them to assist you properly.”

8. The Purple Guide to Health, Safety and Welfare at Music and Other Events reinforces this requirement.
9. In response to her complaint, the Council says the Officer requested evidence of Miss X’s qualifications and experience specifically relevant to event safety and crowd management. It says it sought this information more than once because of the clarity of the information provided. And because of the size of the event to be licensed.
10. Miss X says the Council Officer branded her incompetent, encouraged others to do so and defamed her character. From the information I have seen the Officer confirmed he was not able to consider that the requirements of a ‘competent person’ (as set out in the regulations and The Purple Book) have been met. This decision was based on the information the Council had received.
11. I understand Miss X considers the Officer defamed her character. However, defamation is a civil matter which must be determined by the courts. It is not a matter the Ombudsman can consider.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the application for a license for a music event. We have not seen evidence to show the Council stated Miss X is incompetent nor that it encouraged others to do so. Also, we cannot consider allegations of defamation as this is a matter for the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman