Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how the Council considered councillor conduct complaints. There is not enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify our involvement. And we cannot achieve the outcome the complainant is seeking.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains on behalf of Miss Y. Mrs X says the Council erred in its decision to require a parish council to apologise to Miss Y for breaching the code of conduct, instead of removing the Councillor from office.
2. She wants the Councillor removed from office and Miss Y’s planning costs to be paid for.

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 Mrs X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss Y complained a parish councillor breached the code of conduct by failing to declare an interest in her planning application at a parish council meeting.
7. The Council assessed her complaint and decided there was evidence of a breach of the code. The case was referred for investigation.
8. The investigator discussed the complaint with the parish councillor. The council says following reflection, the parish councillor accepted they had made a mistake and breached the code of conduct.
9. The investigator discussed the matter with the Council’s Monitoring Officer and Independent person. They agreed to require the parish councillor to attend further training on the code of conduct including declaring interests. They also required him to apologise to Miss Y.
10. I understand Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s decision on Miss Y’s complaint. However, the Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the parish council or the councillor complained about. The Ombudsman will not generally criticise decision making if it has taken account of relevant evidence, in line with the correct procedure, even if the complainant does not agree with the decision made.
11. The Council is entitled to reply on the professional judgement of the Monitoring Officer, Independent Person and Investigator when it decided to require the parish councillor to undergo training and to apologise. As Miss Y’s complaint was properly considered in line with the Council’s criteria for Code of Conduct complaints, it is unlikely I could find fault.
12. Also Mrs X wants the parish councillor removed from office and for Miss Y’s planning costs to be paid. This is not something the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in how the Council made its decision to justify our involvement. And we cannot achieve the outcome sought.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman