Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how trading standards dealt with his concerns about a faulty appliance. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing Mr X a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council’s trading standards dealt with his concerns about a faulty appliance. Mr X says the Council’s investigation was inadequate and its communication and complaint handling was poor.

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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. This means we do not take a second look at a decision to decide if it was wrong. Instead, we look at the processes an organisation followed to make its decision. If we consider it followed those processes correctly, we cannot question whether the decision was right or wrong, regardless of whether someone disagree with the decision the organisation made.
7. In this case, the Council considered the information Mr X provided along with information received from the manufacturer about the action that it had taken. It informed the Office for Public Safety and Standards (OPSS) before deciding to take no further action. It informed Mr X how he could make a Freedom of Information request if he wanted copies of information that it considered.
8. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. As the Council considered relevant evidence and acted in line with its own policies, there is not enough evidence of fault in the decision-making process to justify investigating this complaint.
9. Any remaining injustice Mr X has been caused by how the Council communicated with him or dealt with his complaints about these matters would not be considered significant enough to justify investigation. Consequently, we will not investigate these matters.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing him a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman