Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's decision to refuse to investigate a complaint about a councillor’s conduct. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has refused to investigate his complaint about a councillor’s conduct. He says this has taken time and caused him emotional and mental distress.
2. He wants the Council to investigate his complaint and require the councillor to resign.

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. (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’s arrangements for dealing with complaints about councillors.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. 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 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.
7. The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We cannot consider the actions of the Councillor which has led to the complaint being made. 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’s procedures state that complaints will be assessed by the Monitoring Officer who will decide if they should go forward for investigation. There is no right to appeal the Monitoring Officer’s decision.
9. The Monitoring Officer considered Mr X’s evidence provided with his complaint. They confirmed the code of conduct complaints procedure does not deal with hate crimes as these should be referred to the police.
10. They also considered the copies of posts made by the councillor on their social media account. The Monitoring Officer concluded the Councillor was not acting in their capacity as an elected member when making the posts, therefore the code of conduct is not engaged.
11. We will not investigate this complaint. The Monitoring Officer has discretion to decide what complaints will proceed to an investigation. They considered relevant evidence and explained to Mr X how they reached their decision. Although Mr X disagrees with the Monitoring Officer’s decision, there is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council dealt with the complaint to justify an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council considered his complaint. We are not an appeal body and without evidence of fault in the complaint process, we cannot investigate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman