Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault and the complainant has not suffered significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his complaint about the conduct of a councillor. He says the correct process was not followed during the hearing review panel meeting and an unlawful sanction was imposed. Mr X says the Council failed to act after he told it about the issues with the hearing review meeting.
2. Mr X has also complained about how the Council’s interim Monitoring Officer dealt with his complaint about data protection breaches and the councillor’s failure to comply with the sanctions recommended by the review panel.

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,
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained,
• 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. 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.
6. Mr X contacted the Council to complain about a councillor breaching the Council’s code of conduct. The matter was referred to the Council’s hearing review panel. The panel found the code of conduct had been breached and recommended sanctions.
7. Mr X has raised many concerns about the panel hearing. He says the hearing proceeded without input from the Independent Person, one of the sanctions imposed was contrary to policy and the decision notice did not accurately reflect what happened during the hearing.
8. I do not consider Mr X has suffered significant injustice because of these issues. The panel did still find the councillor had breached the code. The list of sanctions included one which the Council accepted was not included as a possible sanction in its policy. But I do not consider this addition caused Mr X injustice and the Council has confirmed the other sanctions were complied with.
9. Mr X has also complained about how the Council dealt with his second code of conduct complaint about the councillor.
10. 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. 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.
11. In this case, I am satisfied the interim Monitoring Officer dealt with the matter in line with the Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints before deciding not to take further action. The Monitoring Officer considered Mr X’s concerns and the evidence available and explained why they did not consider the complaint should be investigated. The interim Monitoring Officer also consulted the Independent Person.
12. I understand Mr X disagrees with the interim Monitoring Officer’s decision. But they were entitled to use their professional judgement to decide a formal investigation was not necessary. As the interim Monitoring Officer properly considered Mr 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

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault. Mr X has also not suffered significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman