Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a councillor conduct complaint as we cannot question the Council’s complaint decision and there is insufficient outstanding injustice, caused to the complainant from any delay, to warrant our further involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council took over two years to provide a decision on the complaint he made to it about a councillor’s conduct. Mr X complains the Council failed to also properly assess the complaint or liaise with its Independent Person (IP). Mr X says this caused him prolonged stress and uncertainty. Mr X would like an apology for the delay and an acknowledgment that the Council did not properly deal with his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 any remaining injustice is not sufficient to justify our further involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code and the Council’s procedure for assessing councillor conduct complaints.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council assessed Mr X’s complaint but decided not to progress it as in its view, the councillor was acting in a private capacity when the conduct complained of took place.
6. In its decision, the Council acknowledged Mr X’s concerns about the time taken to conclude the matter and its lack of updates. While it explained why it had to pause its investigation, it apologised to Mr X for the delay and any frustration caused by it.
7. We will not investigate as the Council assessed Mr X’s complaint and made a decision it is entitled to, and in line with its councillor complaint procedure, which I have had regard to. Under this procedure, consultation with the IP is not required if a councillor is not considered to have been acting in that capacity when the conduct in question took place. In such cases, conduct complaints will not be taken forward, under the Council’s policy.
8. I recognise Mr X remains unhappy with the decision but in the absence of fault by the Council in its consideration, we cannot question it. It is unlikely we will find such fault.
9. The Council has essentially provided the outcome Mr X sought in respect of the delay by apologising to him and explaining why the investigation had been paused. I do not consider there is sufficient remaining injustice caused to Mr X in this regard to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is unlikely we will find fault in the Council’s decision and the Council has already provided the outcome Mr X sought in respect of the delay and so any outstanding injustice in this regard is not sufficient to warrant our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman