Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a complaint against a councillor. There is not enough evidence of fault, and we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council ‘sat on’ and ignored a complaint against him for three years. He says the Council failed to follow its own procedures when dealing with this matter.
2. Mr X wants the Council to apologise to him and cancel any complaints against him which have not progressed and are more than 12 months old.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Councils have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of council decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure the council, its officers, and members uphold the highest standards of conduct. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
7. 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 councillors complained about. 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.
8. The Council confirms it received the complaint in 2020. However, it confirms Mr X was subject to a criminal policy investigation into issues relating to the complaint. Therefore, its complaint investigation was delayed until the police matter was concluded. The criminal investigation concluded with a successful prosecution in 2022.
9. Mr X says he was not told about the complaint until 2023. However, the evidence I have seen shows the Council advised him in writing of the complaint when it was received in 2020. The Council confirms it told Mr X when the complainant withdrew the complaint in 2023.
10. While the delay in progressing the complaint is not ideal, I am satisfied most of the delay was due to the police investigation and prosecution. Also, there is no time limit specified in the Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints against councillors.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault in the way the Council dealt with the complaint against him. Also, we cannot require the Council to dismiss any other historic complaints against him which is the outcome he is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman