Summary: Mr B complains about the way the Council dealt with his complaint against a local councillor. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint as there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr B to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, says the Council has not properly investigated the complaint he made against a local councillor who he accused of abusing their position.

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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, 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. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr B and the Council. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr B made a complaint to the Council about the conduct of a local councillor. Its Standards Sub-Committee met and considered his complaint. The Committee reviewed Mr B’s complaint, the response provided by the councillor and the view of the Independent Person. Having done so it decided there was no evidence to suggest the councillor had breached the Code of Conduct and dismissed Mr B’s complaint.
5. The Committee noted that in his complaint Mr B had suggested the councillor could have potentially committed a criminal offence and it told him that if he thought a crime had been committed he should report it to the police.

Assessment

6. The Council properly considered Mr B’s complaint against the councillor and took into account the view of the Independent Person.
7. While Mr B may be disappointed with the outcome of his complaint, I have seen no evidence to suggest there was fault in the way the matter was dealt with or that he has been caused injustice sufficient to warrant an investigation.
8. Mr B has made reference to corruption in his complaint. If he believes this to have taken place he should report the matter to the police. It is not a matter for the Council or the Ombudsman.
9. If Mr B is dissatisfied with the Council’s response to his request for a copy of the documentation involved with the complaint he made to it then he can contact the Information Commissioner. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection and freedom of information.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr B to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman