Summary: Mr X complained about the Council’s investigation of the behaviour of parish and borough council members in relation to his planning application. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about the Council’s investigation of his complaint about parish and district councillors who made comments about his planning application and showed that they were not impartial.

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
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mr X submitted with his complaint. I have also considered the Council’s response. Mr X has commented on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained about a parish councillor breaching the members’ Code of Conduct by failing to declare an interest when his planning application was discussed by the parish councillor. He says the councillor should have declared an interest because a family member is part of a group opposed to his plans in the village.
5. He also complained that a Borough councillor attended the meeting and expressed views against his application. He believes the member and another borough councillor may have pressurised and influenced planning officers into refusing his application.
6. The Council’s Monitoring officer investigated the complaint and passed the matter for an independent person’s view. The conclusion of the investigation was that parish councillors should receive further training on the application of the Members’ Code. It did not find that the Borough councillors had breached the Code and that they had acted within their remit and did not breach the Code.
7. The Ombudsman’s role in complaints about member standards is limited to considering whether the Monitoring officer had properly investigated the matters we cannot comment on the findings of the investigation where there was no fault.
8. The investigation into the complaint was thorough and there is no evidence of fault in the procedure.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman