Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the way the Council’s Trading Standards department handled his complaint about a car dealer. The complaint is late and it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains about the way the Council’s Trading Standards department dealt with his concerns about a car dealer.

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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I reviewed Mr X’s complaint and the Council’s responses. I shared my draft decision with Mr X and invited his comments.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X contacted the Council in October 2017 to report concerns about a car dealer who sold him a car more than two years earlier. He said the car was not “new” as claimed by the dealer and that due to an issue with the brakes it was not roadworthy.
6. The Council explained to Mr X that it could not prosecute the dealer due to the amount of time that had passed since he purchased his car. The law allows only six months to take action under the Road Traffic Act 1988 for supplying a car in an unroadworthy condition and the Council had concerns about its ability to prove the offence beyond all reasonable doubt so long after the event. The Trading Standards officer did however visit the dealer to remind them of their legal obligations.
7. Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s response. He believes it should have investigated the dealer further and helped him to confront them and resolve the dispute.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. The Council has explained the reasons why it could not take action in Mr X’s case and any complaint about its handling of the matter or its decision is late. The Council informed Mr X it could not take the case further in October 2017 and Mr X did not complain to the Ombudsman about it until January 2019.
9. The Ombudsman has discretion to investigate late complaints but I have seen no good reasons to exercise our discretion in this case. Trading Standards enforce approximately 250 separate pieces of legislation. Their role is in law enforcement, not in dealing with civil disputes between traders and members of the public. Individual complaints can be relevant to the role of Trading Standards where they provide evidence of unlawful behaviour but it is not for Trading Standards to act for a customer to negotiate a resolution. It is therefore unlikely we would find fault by the Council or that we could say it should have done more.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman