Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to respond to his contacts. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has ignored his complaints correspondence over several years and failed to respond to his concerns. He says this means he is being denied access to services and the support he needs. He wants the Council to respond to his complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
3. 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
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

4. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. We will not investigate the Council’s actions before September 2024. Any complaint about its actions prior to this time is late. If Mr X was dissatisfied with the Councils actions before this time, he could have approached us sooner.
8. The Council has told us it has restricted Mr X’s contact under its unacceptable behaviour policy. It reviewed its decision in September 2024 and September 2025 and on each occasion, it decided contact restrictions should remain in place. After each review, it wrote to Mr X to inform him of the decision and its reasons. The restrictions included that the Council would not respond to complaints it had already dealt with, historic matters or those which were derogatory in manner.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. Councils are entitled to restrict a person’s contact where they consider the person’s contact or behaviour to be unreasonable. It has told Mr X it will not respond to his correspondence if it considers it has previously addressed the matters raised. This is a position the Council is entitled to take and there is no evidence of fault in how it has reached its decision. The Council has appropriately reviewed Mr X’s restrictions every 12 months, and on each occasion, told Mr X its reasons for applying ongoing restrictions. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.
10. Mr X made a subject access request in September 2024. If he is dissatisfied with the Council’s response to this, he can complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The ICO is the UK regulator for access to information and data protection matters and is better placed to consider any complaint about this.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better place to consider a complaint about the Councils’ response to his subject access request.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman