Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint about the conduct of a council member at a planning meeting. Mr X says this caused him and his partner distress as they are concerned about the member’s ability to deal with planning applications justly. The Ombudsman will not investigate as this does not constitute a level of injustice to Mr X that would warrant the Ombudsman’s involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has not properly considered his complaint about a council member’s conduct at a planning meeting.

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, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered what Mr X has said in his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained to the Council about various aspects of the conduct of a council member at a planning meeting which he says showed pre-determination and bias. Essentially, Mr X complains the council member wrongly took the chair of a planning meeting and did not step down from the chair when a planning application in his own ward was discussed. Mr X complains the council member was wrong to speak in favour of the application, as the ward member, and should have declared an interest at this point.
5. The Council rejected Mr X’s complaint finding no breaches of the code of conduct.
6. Mr X says the Council has not properly investigated his complaint and that this has caused him and his partner distress. They are concerned about the council member’s ability to consider planning applications justly and refer to a planning proposal which could impact on their own property. This, however, was not subject to consideration at the planning meeting in question.
7. Mr X seeks sanctions to be imposed on the council member and for an investigation to be conducted into all planning applications he has voted on, against officer recommendations.

Analysis

8. From our perspective, Mr X is not significantly or tangibly, personally affected by the council member’s actions at the planning meeting concerned or how the Council dealt with his complaint about it. Mr X’s distress about how the council member might deal with planning applications in future, that may directly impact his property, does not provide grounds for us to investigate this complaint. Additionally, there are not public interest grounds for us to investigate this complaint.
9. We have no role in imposing sanctions on council members and so we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. My decision is that the Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X is not caused a significant injustice from it and the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman