Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s decision not to take further action against a trader who he says sold him a faulty product. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council causing Mr X significant injustice. The issue Mr X reported to the Council is a private civil matter and his remedy for the issue lies in a claim against the trader at court.

The complaint

1. This complaint concerns the handling of Mr X’s report of a rogue trader by the Council’s Trading Standards service, which it shares with other local authorities in the area. Mr X complains the Council failed to take action against the trader and has not properly dealt with his complaint.

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 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

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. We do not investigate all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate we need to consider various tests. These include the alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
5. I appreciate Mr X is frustrated that Trading Standards will not take further action against the trader but its decision does not cause Mr X significant injustice. Mr X’s main injustice stems from the actions of the trader and the Council could not provide him with a remedy for this. It is therefore unlikely an Ombudsman investigation would achieve any worthwhile outcome for Mr X as his remedy for the issue lies in a claim against the trader at court.
6. It is also unlikely we would find fault by the Trading Standards service acting on the Council’s behalf. This is because it was entitled to reach the decision it did and the law does not allow us to question it. Mr X claims gender discrimination but he has provided no evidence to back up his claim. If Mr X wishes to pursue this issue he may wish to speak to the Equality and Human Rights Commission.
7. Mr X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with his complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault by the Council and its decision did not cause Mr X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman