Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss B’s complaint about a council officer’s refusal to cooperate with her business. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect Miss B to find a way to go to court to seek a remedy.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss B, complained about a council officer’s refusal to cooperate with her business. Miss B told us this caused significant financial loss, it affected her confidence, her mental health and her reputation.

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 information Miss B provided and given her an opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Miss B says in the summer of 2018 a council officer refused to cooperate with her business without good cause, other than his opinion of her work, or any prior warning. She says he also reported her to her professional body providing false information. Miss B told us during this time her business was unable to operate, losing about four to five months’ revenue.
7. Miss B made a formal complaint to the Council later in 2018. In its reply to her complaint the Council said the relevant team should not have refused to issue any new project briefs or to approve any new submissions without giving her sufficient prior warning and an explanation. The Council apologised for this and told Miss B it would resume reviewing the work her business had submitted.
8. Miss B says she was told orally in a meeting in March 2019 she would receive compensation if she made a claim. She told us she made a claim about six months later which the Council referred to its insurers. Miss B says the loss adjusters have decided the council officer involved was not negligent so no compensation would be paid.
9. Miss B has taken more than 12 months to complain to us about what happened in 2018. But there was a good reason for this if she thought the Council would resolve her claim.
10. The question of whether the Council is liable for the losses and damage Miss B has described is a legal matter. The Ombudsman considers complaints about a council’s administrative action. His role is not the same as a court of law. A court of law is the appropriate body to decide contested questions of law (such as alleged negligence), whether damages must be paid if the Council has been negligent and to enforce any award of damages. For this reason, although Miss B told us she cannot afford legal help, it is not unreasonable to expect her to find a way to go to court to seek a remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is not unreasonable to expect Miss B to find a way to go to court to seek a remedy.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman