Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council dealt with his complaint that a councillor breach the Council’s code of conduct. Nor is further investigation likely to lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, complains the Council refuses to investigate his complaint that the leader of the council breached the code of conduct.
2. He wants the Council to investigate the Councillor’s actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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 would find fault
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome

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

4. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered:
• the information provided by Mr X including the Council’s response to his complaint
• information provided by the Council
• the Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints that a councillor has breached the code of conduct.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X complained to the Council that the Leader of the Council had made a formal complaint about him to his employer. This caused his employer to investigate the complaint which Mr X says included but was not limited to:
• damning accusations against him and a political group he belongs to
• accusations that he peddled conspiracy theories
• accusation that the political party he belongs to is racist; and
• breached another person’s privacy
7. The Council’s rules for dealing with code of conduct complaints says:

“The Monitoring Officer will review the complaint and following consultation with the Independent Person, take a decision (initial assessment) as to whether it merits investigation, or another course of action. This decision will normally be taken within 20 working days of receipt of a complaint.”

8. It also says:

“The Monitoring Officer may in exceptional circumstances refer the question of how to proceed to a sub-committee of the Standards Committee.”

9. The Council says Mr X’s complaint was one of four complaints made against the Councillor which it considered were linked.
10. The Council says the Monitoring Officer decided to put the matter to the sub-committee to decide the next step, rather than making the decision himself in consultation with the Independent Person. This was because of the nature of the complaints, the subject matter, and the fact they were against the leader,
11. The sub-committee was formed of two councillors from an alternative political party to the Leader and the Independent Person. Having considered the complaint, which included the evidence provided by Mr X and the Councillors comments on his allegation, the sub-committee decided not to take further action on the complaint.
12. Having followed the correct procedure for considering such complaints, this is a decision the Council is entitled to make.
13. The Council advised Mr X of the outcome of his complaint. It correctly informed him there is no right of appeal to decisions on code of conduct complaints. It has confirmed that because of the subject matter and due to data protection concerns, it has only disclosed limited information to Mr X.

Assessment

14. The Ombudsman does not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on member conduct complaints, but we can consider if there was fault in the way the council considered the complaint.
15. The Monitoring Officer considered Mr X’s complaint and consulted the independent person before deciding to refer to the matter to the sub-committee of the Standards Committee for a decision on whether to take further action. This is the correct procedure. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached.

Back to top

Final decision

16. I will not investigate this complaint. The Council followed it published procedure before it decided not to take further action on Mr X’s complaint. We are therefore unlikely to find fault in the Council’s actions. Nor is further investigation likely to lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman