Summary: Mr X complains the Council refuses to consider his complaint about the conduct of a parish councillor. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we have not seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council decided not to investigate his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refuses to investigate his complaint about the conduct of a parish councillor. And the Council failed to support a Police investigation into his allegation the parish councillor committed a crime.

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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained

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

3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr X which includes the Council’s responses. I have also considered the Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints about members.
5. Mr X commented on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. “Under sections 28(6) and (7) of the Localism Act 2011, authorities now must have in place “arrangements” under which allegations that a member or co-opted member of the authority has failed to comply with its code of conduct will be investigated. Arrangements must also be in place setting out how decisions on allegations can be made.”
7. It is for the authority to decide the details of its code of conduct and the arrangements for dealing with complaints about member conduct. Complaints about members of parish or town councils are handled by the principal authority.
8. The Ombudsman has no jurisdiction to investigate the actions of parish councils or their members. Where a complaint about a parish council or councillor is made to the principal authority, we may only review how the complaint has been investigated. We cannot look at the substantive complaint itself.
9. Also, it is the Ombudsman’s role to review authorities’ adherence to procedure when they make decisions. It is not to replace the authority’s decision with his own. Where the decision has been made according to the correct procedure, considering the relevant evidence, the Ombudsman cannot generally criticise the decision, no matter how much a person disagrees with it.
10. The Council publishes “criteria for assessment of complaints against members related to the code of conduct.” This provides criteria which the complaint must meet to be considered for assessment. One point states the behaviour complained about must have occurred within the last 30 days.
11. Mr X’s complaint alleges a parish councillor committed criminal acts in 1997 and 2012 by providing knowingly false information on planning applications.
12. The Council told Mr X that as the events complained about did not happen in the last 30 days, it could not take any further action. It also told Mr X the code of conduct complaints procedure could consider criminal allegations. It advised him to take such allegations to the Police.
13. Mr X says he also wants the Ombudsman to investigate a lack of assistance and support from Sevenoaks Council to assist the police with their enquiries. And that such actions could have led to a successful prosecution, which in turn would have led to the removal of the individual from the parish council.
14. Mr X says the Council has failed to co-operate with a police investigation. And he alleges criminal acts. Both complaints are matters for the police, not the Ombudsman. And while he is clearly concerned Mr X describes no specific, personal injustice.
15. To decide which complaints the Ombudsman can look at, we carry out an initial assessment of every complaint using this ‘Assessment Code’. We apply the code in the same way to all complaints, regardless of how we receive them or what they are about. Once we have established that a complaint is within the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction we then consider other factors which influence our decision on whether we should investigate a complaint.
16. One of these factors is the level of personal injustice the complainant claims to have been caused as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the Council. In this case Mr X has not described any personal injustice suffered because of the Council’s decision not to investigate his complaint about the parish councillor or the way in which the Council acted during a police investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

17. I will not and cannot investigate this complaint. This is because while I understand Mr X is aggrieved by the parish councillor’s actions I cannot fault the way the Council handled his complaint. It responded quickly, having properly followed its own procedures. The Council is entitled to decide to take no further action, and I see no grounds to criticise this decision. Also, I do not consider that Mr X has suffered any significant personal injustice because of the matters complained about.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman