Lancashire County Council (24 008 938)
Category : Environment and regulation > Trading standards
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 15 Nov 2024
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a lack of action by the Trading Standards department. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions. Also, we will not investigate the complaint about the behaviour of Council employees as we do not consider this caused Mr X sufficient personal injustice to warrant our involvement.
The complaint
- Mr X complains:
- the Council failed to send officers to his home to inspect defective building work;
- the Council failed to pursue the builders responsible for the work on his behalf; and
- the Council failed to ensure its officers and staff behaved as local government employees should do.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X complains the Council failed to act on his reports of defective building work by contractors he employed to work in his home.
- The Council contacted Mr X with advice and confirmed they would contact the contractors for him if he wanted. It says Mr X left numerous telephone messages but did not give the Council permission to contact the contractors. After several weeks Mr X gave the Council permission to contact the contractors for him. However, he also told them he did not want the contractors to return and rectify the work. The Council asked Mr X what remedy he was seeking. Mr X then made several complaints to the Council including complaints about the attitude of its staff, grammatical and laying errors in emails, hold music and a lack of serious application to work.
- It is not our role to act as a point of appeal. We cannot normally deal with a complaint about the merits of a council’s properly-taken decision – for example, a decision not to investigate a complaint or not prosecute a trader. Councils have discretion on trading standards matters as to whether, and to what extent, to investigate a particular complaint: and their decisions are taken in the general interests of the public, rather than the interest of the individual complainant. So complaining to the council does not necessarily mean that Mr X has no need to take action against the contractors himself.
- I understand Mr X is not satisfied with the behaviour of Council employees, including errors in correspondence. However, we do not consider this caused Mr X a significant personal injustice which justifies an Ombudsman investigation.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because:
- there is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions; and
- Mr X has not suffered a significant personal injustice which warrants our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman