Summary: Mr B says the Council has failed to consider his complaint about the conduct of named Councillors. The Ombudsman has found evidence of fault because the Council has not replied to all of Mr B’s complaint. He has upheld the complaint and completed the investigation because the Council agrees to fully respond to Mr B.

The complaint

1. The complainant (whom I refer to as Mr B) says the Council has failed to respond to his complaints about Councillors who he believes have acted in breach of the Code of Conduct.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information supplied by Mr B.
5. I shared my draft decision with both parties.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

6. In June 2020 Mr B submitted a Code of Conduct complaint to the Council. He set out, broadly, six key points of complaint about three named Councillors.
7. The Council’s Monitoring Officer subsequently replied on one of the six complaints relating to one Councillor. Mr B says he has not received any other replies from the Council.

What should have happened

8. Under section 5 of the Local Government and Housing Act 1989, relevant authorities have a duty to designate an officer as Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making when considering complaint about a Councilor’s conduct. Complaints that a member has failed to comply with the code of conduct should be dealt with in accordance with the authority’s agreed procedure. The Monitoring Officer will initially assess a complaint and decide whether it merits formal investigation. The Council can dismiss a complaint at the initial stage if, for example, there is no breach of the code of conduct, it does not relate to behavior in the Member’s official capacity as a Councilor, or the matter is so trivial it would not be in the public interest to pursue it further.
9. If an authority decides to formally investigate a complaint, the procedure may involve the Monitoring Officer or another Investigating Officer and a Standards Committee/Hearings Panel. The Council should notify the complainant in writing about the outcome of their case.

Was there fault by the Council

10. The response provided to Mr B in 2020 only relates to one part of his complaint about a Councillor. I cannot see the Council has responded to the remaining five key points or explained in writing if they have been dismissed.

Did the fault cause an injustice

11. Mr B is left uncertain about the outcome of his complaint.

Agreed action

12. The Council has agreed to consider the remainder of Mr B’s complaint and notify him formally about the outcome in line with its procedures. If it decides to dismiss the complaints it should explain the reasons why to Mr B.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I have completed the investigation and upheld the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman