Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint made against a local councillor. We will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence to suggest there has been fault by the Council which has caused Mr X injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains about the Council’s handling of his complaint made against a local councillor. He says the Council failed to evaluate all the evidence he had provided, including his claim that the councillor had made accusations and slanderous comments against him in public. He says he wants an apology and for the councillor concerned not to involve himself in Mr X’s planning enforcement case which is the issue around which the complaint revolves.

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
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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 and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

4. Since 2019, when Mr X carried out work at his property which did not accord with the plans on which his planning permission had been granted, the Council has asked him to submit a retrospective planning application or risk it taking enforcement action against him for a planning breach.
5. In 2020 Mr X made a Members Code of Conduct complaint against a councillor in connection with a neighbour dispute which arose in relation to the planning case. Mr X provided evidence in support of his complaint and this was considered by the Council’s Monitoring Officer (MO) and, in accordance with normal procedures, discussed with the Independent Person.
6. Having reviewed matters, the Council decided there had been no breach of the Code of Conduct and so told Mr X the matter would not be investigated further. It noted the councillor had been allowed to speak at a Planning Committee meeting on behalf of a resident and that the decision on whether to take enforcement action against Mr X was one made without any input from the councillor.
7. Dissatisfied with the Council’s response, Mr X complained to us.

Assessment

8. 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 the council considered the complaint, we will only investigate if there is sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement or we consider it in the public interest to do so.
9. In this case, there is no evidence to suggest there was fault in the way the Council dealt with the matter, and there is insufficient injustice caused to Mr X to warrant an investigation.
10. If Mr X believes he has been slandered by the councillor, he can take legal action in the courts.
11. In responding to my draft decision Mr X says his complaint was against the councillor, that the injustice to him was caused by the councillor and that he wants an apology from the Council about the councillor’s behaviour. However, we do not review the behaviour of councillors. Instead, our role is to look at how a council has dealt with a complaint about a councillor. The Council considered Mr X’s complaint that the councillor had breached the Members Code of Conduct. It properly sought the views of the Independent Person but decided to take no further action. This is a decision it was entitled to take and it is not open to us to review the merits of it. Moreover, we will generally not investigate complaints where the outcome sought is an apology.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence to suggest there has been fault by the Council which has caused Mr X injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman