Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaints about the way the Council dealt with a tendering process for clearing waste from a site. The complaint is late, and the significant loss Mr B claims makes this a matter better considered by the courts.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr B, complains the Council falsely awarded a contract to a different company, leading Mr B’s company to lose £76,000.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered the detailed information provided by Mr B and the Ombudsman’s role and powers. I sent a draft decision to Mr B and discussed the complaint with him before making my final decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr B’s company first tendered for work to clear waste materials from a site in 2011. In December 2011, the Council told Mr B his company had been unsuccessful because the Council had been unable to evaluate the submission against the tender criteria. The contract was awarded to Firm A.
7. In 2013, Mr B’s company approached the Council to enquire about completing the remaining work on the site. Mr B’s company carried out some research work on site and prepared a quote to complete the work. In 2013, the Council told Mr B’s company that it would stay with Firm A and it would complete the outstanding work.
8. Mr B complains the Council’s approach has cost his company £76,000 and says his family business had nearly £1million invested in a project at the site.
9. These are not matters the Ombudsman will investigate. Mr B has known about the Council’s tendering decision since 2011 and 2013. The complaint is therefore late and the restriction in paragraph 3 applies.
10. There are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate this late complaint. There are no good reasons why Mr B could not have complained sooner. And as Mr B is claiming substantial losses from the Council’s actions, these are matters that are better considered by the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the complaint is late and there are no good reasons for the Ombudsman to exercise his discretion and now investigate.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman