Worcester City Council (24 009 217)

Category : Other Categories > Councillor conduct and standards

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 01 Oct 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about delay by the Council in responding to Mr X’s complaint that a councillor made antisemitic comments. This is because there is insufficient personal loss or harm to Mr X to justify our further involvement.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complained that the Council had not responded to his complaints that a councillor made antisemitic comments. Mr X wanted a response and for the Council to issue a public statement about the comments as he was concerned for local Jewish people.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. In the period after Mr X complained to us, the Council provided its complaint response to him, apologising for the delay which is said was caused by an oversight. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint as it did not consider the conduct complained about equated to a breach of the councillor’s code of conduct.
  2. While I recognise Mr X has strong feelings about this matter, I do not consider he is personally impacted to a degree, from either the comments or the Council’s handling of his complaint, that would justify our further involvement. We have limited resources and must direct them to the most serious cases, in the public interest.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he is not caused a level of personal loss or harm from his complaint to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings