Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an incident which occurred while someone was filming. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains about the conduct of officers when they saw someone filming in the town.

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 the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (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 watched the video of the incident. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

4. Someone was filming in the town. An officer asked the man to explain what he was doing. The man declined to answer. The officer was joined by two other officers and for about 15 minutes the officers tried to find out what the man was doing; the man maintained he was not required to provide any information. The man posted a video of the event on social media.
5. Mr X lives in the north of the country. He saw the video and complained to the Council. He said he would never visit Basingstoke and complained that the officers bullied and harassed a member of the public. He said the officers should be retrained or moved to other positions. Mr X said people are allowed to take photographs and have the right to remain silent. Mr X said the man was carrying out his lawful rights.
6. In response the Council explained that the officers approached the man because they had been made aware of someone filming and acting in an unusual manner. It confirmed people can film but officers have a duty to ensure public safety. It explained that when the man declined to explain why he was filming, the officers felt it was even more important to find out what he was doing. The Council said they could not ignore what the man was doing because there were safety concerns.
7. Mr X is dissatisfied with reply. He says the Council bullied and intimidated the man, and abused his human rights. He said the man did nothing wrong and the Council acted like the Russian state police. He wants the Council to retrain the officers and admit it cannot abuse citizens rights.

Assessment

8. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Mr X was not involved in the incident and lives about 300 miles from the where the incident occurred. He also says he will not visit the area. I appreciate Mr X is unhappy with the events he saw in the video but the incident had no impact on him so there is no reason to start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman