Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of a Trading Standards investigation. This is because its actions did not cause Mrs X significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mrs X, complains about the Council’s investigation into the actions of a local tradesman. She believes the Council took too long to decide to end its investigation and questions the reasons for its decision. She also complains the Council made several procedural and administrative errors and gave her incorrect information.

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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mrs X claims significant financial loss due to the actions of the trader and is aware her report to the Council and a complaint to the Ombudsman will not help her to recover her money. If she wishes to pursue this further she may wish to seek legal advice about a claim against the trader at court.
5. Mrs X felt that formal action by the Council as part of its Trading Standards function may help to ensure that what happened to her did not happen to anyone else. In this respect she saw prosecution as a possible future deterrent.
6. But while I appreciate Mrs X was disappointed with the Council’s decision not to take formal action neither the decision nor the Council’s handling of the matter caused her significant injustice. The Council could never have provided Mrs X with a remedy for her losses and any benefit to the trader from not being prosecuted is not an injustice to Mrs X. It is also worth noting that even if the Council had prosecuted the trader there is no guarantee the courts would have convicted them.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council’s actions did not cause Mrs X significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman