Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s failure to report his allegations about a councillor’s interests to the police. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because it concerns allegations about an alleged criminal offence which is a matter for the police to decide. The Council did not consider there was evidence of a breach of the Localism Act 2011 to involve the police.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about the Council’s failure to pass his evidence about a councillor on to the local police. He says the councillor breached the Localism Act 2011 when he failed to declare a pecuniary interest in property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response and Mr X has commented on the draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained to the Council about a councillor whom he accused of breaching the requirements of the Localism Act 2011 concerning registering a pecuniary interest in property. Failure to register such an interest can be a criminal offence and Mr X asked the Council to refer his evidence to the police. When he checked with the police he found no evidence had been submitted.
5. The Council says that the evidence which Mr X supplied did not show that the councillor had breached the requirement to declare a pecuniary interest. It says the property concerned and the discounts it may receive was not directly under the complete control of the councillor and there was no evidence that it had benefited from additional discounts.
6. The Ombudsman cannot consider complaints about failures by councillors to disclose pecuniary interests. This is because they constitute potentially criminal matters and are for the police to decide. We would expect a council to have a procedure for dealing with breaches under the Act and referring them to the police but in this case the evidence did not warrant such action.

Back to top

Final decision

7. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because it concerns allegations about an alleged criminal offence which is a matter for the police to decide. The Council did not consider there was evidence of a breach of the Localism Act 2011 to involve the police.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman