Summary: Mrs X complained about comments made by a local councillor about the proposed closure of roads in her area. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice which would warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says a local councillor expressed support for a proposed scheme to close local roads with planters which she disagrees with. She says the comments indicated that the proposals would benefit residents by making the area more desirable and of increased value. She says this indicated that she was seeking to manipulate the voting of residents on the proposals.

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
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I have considered all the information which Mrs X submitted with her complaint. Mrs X has been given an opportunity to comment on a draft copy of my decision.

Back to top

What I found

4. Mrs X complained about comments made by a councillor on social media supporting proposals for closing roads using planters. She says the comments expressed support for the scheme which she said would increase the value and desirability of the road. Mrs X believes this shows that she was trying to manipulate local opinion in favour of the scheme.
5. The Council carried out an investigation of Mrs X’s complaint that the councillor had breached the Members’ Code of Conduct. It found that there was no breach because the councillor was simply expressing an opinion in support of the scheme and she had no personal advantage to be gained and was not part of the decision-making process.
6. Local councillors are able to express views about proposed changes in their areas and this includes the type of scheme in question. The comments caused no personal injustice to Mrs X. The scheme has not yet been implemented and will be subject to a traffic regulation order process in which the public will have an opportunity to comment.
7. We may only consider a council’s investigation of a complaint about a breach of the members’ Code and not the primary issues. I can find no evidence of fault or any significant injustice to Mrs X resulting from the investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault or injustice which would warrant an investigation.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman