Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council decided not to prosecute a builder. The complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the complaint. The claimed injustice is the fault of the builder, not the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall call Mrs B, says the Council refuses to prosecute a builder who carried out defective work on her home.
2. She says this has caused financial loss and stress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The law allows councils discretion on trading standards matters about whether and to what extent to investigate a particular complaint. Councils make their decisions in the general interests of the public rather than the interest of an individual complainant.
7. Mrs B complains about the Council’s decision not to prosecute a builder who carried out work on her home.
8. The Council confirms:
• the builder who worked on Mrs B’s home went into liquidation after the work
• it has not received any other complaints about the builder; and
• it will continue to check the history of any business it receives a complaint about to establish if there Is a pattern developing.
9. While Mrs B is clearly concerned about the builder’s practices, the Council’s decision not to prosecute does not cause her significant personal injustice. The Council’s decision not to prosecute the builder for trading standards offences does not mean there was nothing wrong with the work he carried out for Mrs B. The injustice they describe is the result of the builder’s actions rather than the Council’s decision not to prosecute.
10. It is for Mrs B to take legal action against the builder for the claimed financial loss and injustice, rather than the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because the complaint does not meet the tests set out in our Assessment Code. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the process leading to the Council’s decision not to prosecute the builder.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman