Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Surrey Police and Crime Panel considered his complaint about the Surrey Police and Crime Commissioner. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, says the Police and Crime Panel has failed to properly exercise its delegated powers to request the Police and Crime Commissioner provide key documents relating to a previous complaint made by Mr X. He says the Panel wrongly decided that the criminal allegations he had made were not serious enough to be referred to the Independent Office for Police Conduct.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. 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 will find fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr X, including the Panel’s response to his complaint. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

5. For a number of years Mr X has been pursuing complaints about police-related matters which have had a significant impact upon him. The Police and Crime Panel has previously considered a complaint by Mr X about these matters.
6. In September 2020 Mr X made a further complaint believing he had new relevant information in relation to his case. The Panel considered his new complaint but decided it would take no further action because the complaint was more than 12 months old and because it considered it covered the same issues as his previous complaint.
7. Dissatisfied with this response, Mr X complained to the Ombudsman.

Assessment

8. It is not the role of the Ombudsman to review the merits of decisions properly taken by police and crime panels no matter how strongly complainants may disagree with them. In this case the Panel considered Mr X’s latest complaint but decided to take no further action for reasons it explained. This is a decision it was entitled to make and I have seen no evidence to suggest the Panel did not properly consider matters.

Back to top

Final decision

9. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because an investigation is unlikely to find evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman