Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s response to his complaint about the actions of a councillor. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s response to his complaint about a councillor who he says has misled the public and the police about the status of a footpath by Mr X’s property. He says this has been very stressful and he wants the councillor to stop giving out false information.

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 evidence of fault. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Mr X and the Council. I gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mr X complained to the Council about the actions of a neighbour, who is also a councillor. His complaint concerned information the councillor was presenting about the status of a footpath by Mr X’s property.
5. Mr X maintains the footpath cannot be used by vehicles but he says the councillor told the police and members of the public that vehicles could use the path and that it was a byway.
6. In accordance with normal procedures, the Council’s Monitoring Officer discussed the Code of Conduct complaint Mr X made about the councillor with the Independent Person. Having done so, the Monitoring Officer wrote to Mr X to explain that the Code only applies to councillors acting in their official capacity as a councillor and that as the councillor was not acting in his official capacity the Council did not consider the complaint Mr X had made could amount to a breach of the Code. It told Mr X it would take no further action.
7. Dissatisfied with the Council’s response, Mr X complained to us.

Assessment

8. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint but decided the councillor was not acting in his official capacity and that there had been no breach of the Code of Conduct. We do not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on member conduct complaints and while we can consider if there was fault in the way a council considered a complaint, in this case I have seen no evidence to suggest there was fault.
9. Mr X says his complaint also covers other councillors and not just the one the subject of his Code of Conduct complaint to the Council. However, if he has a complaint against other councillors, he will need to first raise this with the Council. Should his complaint/s cover the same issues, and the councillors found not to be acting in an official capacity then it is likely the outcome will be the same.
10. Mr X has complained about the actions of the police in connection with matters relating to the footpath but the police do not fall within our jurisdiction and so by law we cannot look at complaints made against this body.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault in the way the Council considered the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman