Kettering Borough Council (20 011 194)

Category : Other Categories > Councillor conduct and standards

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 05 Mar 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: Mr X complains about the actions of a Council solicitor which he says were unprofessional. We will not investigate this complaint. If Mr X believes the Council has broken a binding legal agreement, he can take the matter to court.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, says the Council’s solicitor acted unprofessionally when they allegedly reneged on an agreement for an early release from a commercial contract.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
  2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the information provided by Mr X including the Council’s responses to his complaint.
  2. Mr X had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr X was party to a commercial contract with the Council.
  2. He negotiated an early release from the contact. He says the Council accepted a ‘without prejudice’ offer he made. Then, after he signed and returned an electronic version of the Deed of Surrender, the Council decided to change the terms of the agreement and renegotiate.
  3. Mr X says this caused him and a third party a great deal of stress. He wants an apology from the Council’s solicitor for unprofessional behaviour and £2000 compensation.
  4. The Council told Mr X that his proposals were headed ‘without prejudice’. Therefore, either party could walk away from the agreed proposal at any point before conclusion. If says in this case, conclusion required it to have received the signed Deed, an agreed completion date and the money paid.
  5. As it had not received the money nor a hard copy of the signed deed, it was within its rights to raise further issues.
  6. Mr X disagrees with the Council’s view. However, we investigate complaints of maladministration where there is no other reasonable alternative for the person complaining. It is not our role to resolve contractual disputes or adjudicate on disputed points of law. Such matters are more appropriate for the courts. If Mr X believes the Council has broken a binding legal agreement warranting the payment of compensation, it would be reasonable for him to make a claim against the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because would be reasonable for Mr X to take the matter to court.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings