Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council considered a complaint about a councillor. We have not seen enough evidence of fault in the Council’s decision-making to justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s decision not to investigate his complaint that a councillor breached the code of conduct.
2. He says this has impacted on a planning decision which has made it impossible for him to enter or exit his home safely.
3. Mr X wants the Council to correct its mistake for the sake of public safety.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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, 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained a councillor breached the code of conduct on a planning issue where she has a personal relationship with the applicant.
8. The Monitoring Officer assessed Mr X’s complaint against its published criteria for code of conduct complaints. She decided:
• Mr X’s partner had raised unnecessary, frivolous and unfounded accusations against the Councillor.
• The Council did not attend the parish council meeting where the planning application was discussed.
• The Councillor had reported an incident to the police whereby she had felt intimidated.
• The actions of Mr X’s partner were turning into harassment against the councillor.
• The complaint concerned something which occurred more than six months before Mr X made his complaint.

The Monitoring Officer decided not to investigate Mr X’s complaint.

9. I understand Mr X disagrees with the Council’s decision. 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 councillor complained about. The Ombudsman will not generally criticise decision making if it has taken account of relevant evidence and is in line with the correct procedure, even if the complainant does not agree with the decision made.
10. Also, Mr X says he wants the Council to “correct its mistake for the sake of public safety”. This relates to the planning decision regarding work at his neighbour’s property. This is not something the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have not seen enough evidence of fault in the way the Council consider his code of conduct complaint.
12. Also, we cannot achieve the outcome Mr X is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman