Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of her Code of Conduct complaints. We have already considered and decided part of her complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has failed to investigate six Code of Conduct complaints she has raised since June 2024. She says this has caused distress, affected her wellbeing and enabled harassment, bullying and reputational damage to continue. She wants the Council to investigate and conclude her complaints.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate complaints about matters we have previously considered and decided.
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council’s Monitoring Officer is responsible for considering complaints that an elected member has breached the Members’ Code of Conduct. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
8. The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are also unable to investigate or comment on actions of the councillor 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 disagrees with it.
9. I have considered each of Ms X’s six complaints chronologically from June 2024.
10. We cannot investigate Ms X’s first complaint in June 2024 as we have already considered and decided a complaint about this in October 2024. We cannot investigate the same matters twice.
11. She raised a second complaint in July 2024. The Council has provided evidence that it told her in August 2024 that it would not investigate due to ongoing Police proceedings.
12. She raised two further complaints in October 2024 and asked for these to be considered confidentially. The Monitoring Officer considered her request but decided they could not agree to this. They wrote to her inviting her to withdraw her complaint or provide consent to share her identity and details of the complaint with the subject member. The Council has told us Ms X did not respond to this letter.
13. She raised two further complaints in January 2025. The Monitoring Officer decided that neither of these complaints fell under the remit of the Code of Conduct. It wrote to her and signposted her to the correct bodies for her to raise her concerns.
14. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has considered and responded to each of Ms X’s complaints. Although I accept Ms X may not agree with the outcomes, its decision making appears in line with its procedures for dealing with Code of Conduct complaints. There is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we have previously considered and decided part of the complaint and there is insufficient evidence of fault to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman