Summary: Ms X complained the Council failed to provide an adequate response to her complaint about an incident she reported in the changing facilities at a leisure centre. The Council was not at fault. It investigated the matter in line with policy and provided Ms X with a satisfactory response to her complaint.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council failed to provide an adequate response to her complaint about an incident she reported in the changing facilities at a leisure centre. Ms X said she wants the Council to properly reassess the changing facilities to prevent recurrence of similar incidents. Ms X said the Council’s failure to this means she can no longer use the leisure centre.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. When a council commissions another organisation to provide services on its behalf it remains responsible for those services and for the actions of the organisation providing them.
4. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Ms X about her complaint.
6. I considered the Council’s response to Ms X’s complaint.
7. I considered the Council’s response to my enquiry letter.
8. Ms X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on draft decision. I considered comments before I made a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. The Council has a leisure centre in its area and uses a contractor to operate and manage the centre on its behalf. As part of the agreement the Council has accepted the contractor’s policies and procedures about how it manages the and runs the leisure centre.
10. The leisure centre has a swimming pool and changing facilities called a ‘changing village’. The Council said it implemented the changing village in line with the ‘Sport England’ national guidance. The changing village is a unisex changing area with individual cubicles. The guidance recommends leisure centres implement the changing village layout rather than open plan single sex areas. The guidance says the village has key design benefits such as greater flexibility, offers greater privacy by using well designed cubicles and accommodates varying mixes of male, female, families and people with disabilities.
11. Ms X uses the leisure centre swimming pool. In 2019 she reported an incident which happened in the changing village. Ms X said she was using the shower in a private cubicle and said a man reached under the dividing wall and touched her leg. Ms X said she exited the shower and asked another customer to find a member of staff. Ms X reported the incident to the member of staff who then reported it to the duty manager, however the perpetrator had already left.
12. The records show the leisure centre duty manager completed an incident report with Ms X about what happened. The leisure centre carried out an investigation into the matter. The investigation record shows there were no other incidents of this nature within the previous 48 months. The record considered the changing village and its layout. It said the leisure centre has women only sessions on one evening each week and also has group and accessible changing facilities for people not comfortable using the village. The investigation recognised the changing village could have additional signage to direct customers to these facilities. It also said the village could have further additional signage to provide users with information on how to report similar incidents of inappropriate behaviour.
13. The investigation said staff had reviewed the leisure centre CCTV however due to the privacy element of the changing village, cameras only covered the locker areas. It found the changing village had well lit open spaces, supported by the locker area CCTV and had an adequate staff presence. The leisure centre concluded it could not have foreseen or prevented Ms X’s incident. It said it would implement the additional signage.
14. Ms X complained to the Council about the matter. Ms X said the layout of the changing village put people at risk. She said the Council should carry out a proper risk assessment of the village with the safety of young people and women in mind. Ms X said the village needed structural changes to prevent similar incidents and emergency alarms in the cubicles so victims of incidents can quickly call on staff to help.
15. The Council responded to Ms X’s complaint. It said the leisure centre implemented the changing village in line with national guidance widely used in the leisure industry. The Council said it was satisfied that all the cubicles have locks and the changing village is well lit and regularly checked by staff. The Council said the leisure centre has alarms in activity areas but not in the changing facilities which is standard practice. The Council told Ms X it was implementing signage to better inform customers on how to report inappropriate behaviour.
16. Ms X was unhappy with the Council’s response. She said the Council had failed to properly consider what actually happened to her. She said new signage was not good enough. She said the changing village was badly designed, and the cubicle sides should be longer to prevent people being able to reach under as happened with her. Ms X said the leisure centre should put on more women only sessions.
17. The Council responded at stage two of its complaint’s procedure. The Council said it was satisfied the leisure centre had properly investigated the incident. It said staff checked CCTV, and although there was one person who matched the description given by Ms X, they were not regular members and so had no membership details on record. The Council said there was no record that Ms X reported the incident to the police. The Council reiterated the findings of the leisure centre investigation. It said Ms X’s suggestions of alarms were considered but decided not best practice. The Council said the leisure centre staff now walk through the changing village every 30 minutes, on top of implementing the new signage.
18. Ms X remained unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

19. Ms X told the Ombudsman that she was unhappy with the Council’s response to the incident, rather than the incident itself. Ms X said she had no complaints about the leisure centre staff who she said dealt with the matter very well.
20. The changing village is designed in line with the national guidance. I have seen no evidence which shows otherwise. The leisure centre carried out the investigation into Ms X’s report in line with its accident and investigation policy. It then carried out a review in line with the policy to establish whether to carry out any remedial action to prevent reoccurrence. It decided to implement new signage and now requires staff to carry out regular 30-minute checks of the changing areas. It considered Ms X’s suggestions about alarms and restructure of the facilities but decided not to implement them.
21. The Council reviewed the leisure centre’s handling of the matter when it responded to Ms X’s complaint. It explained what action the leisure centre took in response to the report and why it was not implementing Ms X’s suggestions. It explained why the changing village design was acceptable and in line with the national guidance. The Council had provided an adequate response to Ms X’s concerns on the matter. I have found no fault in the Council’s complaint response to Ms X.
22. The Ombudsman is not an appeal body. We cannot criticise the Council’s actions or decisions unless there was fault in how it made them. In this case the leisure centre, acting on behalf of the Council carried out an investigation and considered what action to take following Ms X’s report, in line with the relevant policy. The Council has followed the process we would expect and decided to make no further changes to the layout of the changing village. I have found no fault in how the Council handled the matter or in how it responded to Ms X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

23. I have completed my investigation. The Council was not at fault

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman