Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint about the conduct of a local councillor. The Ombudsman will not investigate as Mr X is not caused a significant injustice from his complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains a local councillor failed to attend a pre-arranged meeting or answer his questions about a local traffic problem. Mr X complains about how the Council dealt with his complaint.

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 the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered what Mr X said in his complaint. I have considered Mr X’s comments about my draft decision, which I sent to him.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X has been involved with the Council, over an extended period, in trying to address parking issues where he lives.
5. Mr X was due to meet with a local councillor to discuss these issues but complains he was left waiting for 30 minutes at the Council offices before being told the councillor had cancelled the meeting. Mr X says this was frustrating and wasted his time and was deeply offensive to him. Mr X also complains the same councillor has refused to acknowledge, or respond to, multiple questions he has asked about the traffic issues.
6. Mr X complained to the Council about these issues and is unhappy that the Council has decided to take no further action. Mr X feels the councillor’s behaviour is completely unacceptable and considers, at the least, a formal apology should be made to him.
7. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint but did not conclude a breach of its code of conduct had occurred. In terms of Mr X’s questions about the traffic issues, the Council says its traffic manager has set out the Council’s position and communicated this to Mr X.

Assessment

8. Mr X clearly remains dissatisfied, but from our perspective, the injustice caused to him, from the councillor failing to attend a meeting is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.
9. The Council continues to liaise with residents and has set out its position to Mr X in respect of how it is addressing the traffic issues. While I appreciate Mr X expected a personal response from the councillor, I cannot see that Mr X is significantly affected by this not taking place.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. My decision is that the Ombudsman should not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because Mr X is not caused significant injustice from his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman