Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of a report of a workplace health and safety incident. This is because further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly investigate a workplace accident which occurred in 2024. He says the Council closed the case without obtaining key evidence, including CCTV footage and accident records. Mr X says this resulted in the loss of potentially important evidence, affecting his ability to establish what happened and pursue accountability. He seeks an apology, a reopening of the investigation, service improvements and a financial remedy for his distress and time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X contacted the Council in January 2026 about a workplace accident which occurred in October 2024. The Council treated the matter as a regulatory enquiry and sought further information from Mr X about the circumstances of the accident and the injuries sustained.
6. The Council considered the information provided, noted it had not received a Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and Dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR) notification relating to the incident, and applied the relevant guidance. It concluded there was insufficient information to determine whether the incident met the RIDDOR reporting threshold or the Council's criteria for investigation. The Council therefore decided not to take the matter any further.
7. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagrees with the decision the organisation made.
8. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council considered Mr X's concerns, sought further information, took account of the relevant guidance and reached a decision not to investigate. I have seen no evidence to suggest fault in the way the Council reached that decision.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as further investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint, because further investigation would be unlikely to find evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman