Summary: We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint about lighting conditions because she has not suffered significant personal injustice. We could also add nothing further to the Council’s response and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

The complaint

1. Miss Y complains about the lighting conditions across various retail stores within the local area. She says flickering lights is a health and safety concern for vulnerable people, which triggers neurological symptoms. Miss Y also complains about the type of lighting used across the stores and wants the Council to properly investigate this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We will not usually investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34B(8))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss Y complained to the Council about the type of lighting used across various retail stores within the local area. The Council explained that it did not currently consider the lighting used across retail premises to be a priority area of concern. It said the issues Miss Y raised did not meet its incident selection criteria. The Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to reach this decision, and we could add nothing further to its response.
7. Miss Y raised concerns about flickering lights across some stores, explaining her friend and family member had experienced similar neurological symptoms because of this. The Council advised Miss Y to firstly raise concerns about flickering lights directly with the stores. It explained that if the stores failed to address this, Miss Y could then report this to the Council to investigate. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement, therefore we will not investigate this complaint.
8. Whilst I recognise Miss Y’s concerns for her friend and family member, there is insufficient evidence of her suffering significant personal injustice. We will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by an organisation. In addition, we will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern, but where they have not suffered injustice.
9. Miss Y has also complained about the Council’s complaint handling. However, where the Ombudsman has decided not to investigate the substantive issues complained about, we will not usually use public resources to consider more minor matters such as complaint handling.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss Y’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of her having suffered significant personal injustice to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman. We could also add nothing further to the Council’s response, and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman