Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council is misusing public funds as it contracts with a care home that has allegedly breached restrictive covenants. This is because there is no evidence of a significant personal injustice caused to Mr X.

The complaint

1. In short, Mr X complains the Council is misusing public funds on the basis it contracts with a care home, which Mr X claims, has breached restrictive covenants to restrict business operations at its premises. This is causing Mr X concern.

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.
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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. Mr X lives near a care home that he regards as breaching restrictive covenants. Mr X says the Council is in a contractual relationship with the care home, so it has a duty to inform the care home that it is in breach of restrictive covenants.
6. The Council says this is not a matter for it to take up as it is not the landlord of the property in question. It says it is not in any position to decide if a breach of any restrictive covenants has taken place.
7. We will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by an organisation. In addition, we will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern, but where they have not suffered injustice.
8. We will not investigate. This is because there is no evidence of a consequential significant injustice arising to Mr X.
9. A court can determine if a covenant has been breached. Mr X has recourse to the courts to determine any breach, and to decide any consequences, such as granting an injunction, to stop the alleged activity.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no evidence of a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman