Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the actions of the Council’s trading standards team. This is because Mr X has not suffered an injustice by the actions of the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that a trading standards officer allowed someone to confiscate items from him. Mr X says the confiscation of the items has caused him a financial loss and distress.

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 any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained. (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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council’s trading standards team took part in a multi-agency operation at an event where items were being sold. The Council’s role at the event was to ensure compliance with street trader legislation.
6. During an inspection of the items that Mr X was selling, Mr X says a third party confiscated items from him.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence that the actions of the Council caused Mr X an injustice. The Council had no jurisdiction over the third party so had no power to either instruct them to confiscate the items or prevent them from doing so. The injustice Mr X describes relates to the actions of the third party and not the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not suffered an injustice by any action by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman