Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Deputy Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a local councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Ms X, has complained about comments a local councillor made about her on social media. Ms X says she has been caused considerable stress by the matter and is unhappy with how the Council has dealt with her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. Local Authorities have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure that the authority, its officers and members maintain the highest standards of conduct. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
5. The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are also unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the councillor complained about. We can consider the Council’s administration of a code of conduct complaint. However, where a decision has been made in line with the correct procedure, taking account of the relevant evidence, the Ombudsman will generally not criticise the decision, even if the complainant does not agree with it.
6. In this case, I am satisfied the Deputy Monitoring Officer dealt with the matter in line with the Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints. The Deputy Monitoring Officer considered Ms X’s concerns and the evidence available before deciding not to take any further action. The Deputy Monitoring Officer said the code of conduct guidance says that councillors can respond to criticism and where the criticism is robust, they can be robust in their response. The Deputy Monitoring Officer decided the comments made by the councillor about Ms X fell into this category.
7. I understand Ms X may disagree with the Deputy Monitoring Officer’s findings, but they were entitled to use their judgement to decide further investigation was not necessary. As the Deputy Monitoring Officer dealt with Ms X’s concerns in line with the Council’s criteria for code of conduct complaints, it is unlikely I could find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman