Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about an incident in a shop regarding a face covering. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely the Ombudsman could add to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Ms X, says a Council officer was rude to her, and bullied her, when she was in a shop. The incident has affected her health and she cannot go back to the shop. Ms X would like an apology and compensation.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, 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

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered comments Ms X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Face coverings

4. It is a legal requirement to wear a face covering in shops. People with some medical conditions are exempt from wearing a covering. People who are not exempt can be fined for not wearing a face covering.

What happened

5. Ms X was in a shop. She has a health condition and was not wearing a face covering. Ms X says a Council officer pointed at her and commented to the store manager that she was not wearing a mask. Ms X says she told the officer it is rude to point. She says that when she explained she had a health condition the officer just walked off without apologising. Ms X says the officer’s comments were unacceptable and he did not treat her with integrity or respect. Ms X now feels anxious when shopping and will not go back to that shop. Ms X wants the Council to apologise. She also wants compensation because the Council has discriminated against her.
6. In response to her complaint the Council explained it has a duty to enforce the legislation and the wearing of face coverings. It said it is an offence not to wear a mask unless the person is exempt. The Council explained its officers had been visiting shops in the area to improve compliance. On the day in question, an officer was speaking to the store manager about that store. The officer noted a high level of compliance and that Ms X was the only person not wearing a mask. The Council says the officer was not talking about Ms X and did not approach her. Instead, according to the Council, Ms X approached the officer and expressed her dissatisfaction. Ms X explained she was exempt. The Council accepts there are differing views about what happened and about what was said. The Council suggested Ms X may like to consider carrying an exemption card.

Assessment

7. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because it is unlikely I could add to the Council’s response.
8. Councils have a duty to enforce the legislation and the officer was in the store, talking to the manager, as part of those enforcement duties. The Council says the officer did not approach Ms X and was not talking about her. But, even if he did approach her, as Ms X alleges, he would have been acting within his enforcement duties. It is correct that everyone in a shop is required to wear a face covering, unless exempt, and must be prepared to explain they are exempt if they are approached.
9. There are different views about what happened and what exactly was said. But, as I did not witness the incident, it is unlikely an investigation would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely I could add to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman