Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about action the Council took after the complainant did not give sufficient notice to end his leisure centre membership. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because it has decided to waive the £10 fee.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council sent a threatening letter and charged a £10 fee in relation to his leisure centre membership.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the Council has already provided a remedy.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I received an email from the Council saying it has decided to waive the £10 fee. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

Leisure centre – terms and conditions

4. The rues say that if someone cancels their membership without giving 28 days notice they will be charged the arrears plus £10 a month. The rules also say the Council may take enforcement action to collect the debt.

What happened

5. Mr X cancelled his leisure centre membership. He did not give 28 days notice. Mr X says the Council sent a threatening letter demanding £28 plus a monthly fee of £10. Mr X says the letter threatened legal action and was provocative given that it was a first letter about the debt.
6. Mr X paid the arrears but declined to pay the £10. He tried to complain but found the officer insisted that he put the complaint in writing.
7. In response the Council explained that the £10 fee was stated in the terms and conditions. The Council apologised and said the letter does come across as threatening and unkind. It explained it is a letter drafted by the legal department for all Council services. The Council apologised for the wrong information it had given about the ways he could make a complaint.
8. In response to my enquires the Council repeated that it had handled Mr X’s membership correctly. However, it has decided to waive the £10 fee. Mr X does not now owe any money to the Council.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. This is because the Council charged a £10 fee which is the amount stated in the rules when someone gives less than 28 days notice for cancelling their membership. The fee, and the letter, reflect the terms and conditions so there is no reason to start an investigation. The Council misinformed Mr X about the complaints process but it has apologised and this is not a fault which requires an investigation.
10. In addition, the Council has decided to waive the fee which is the outcome Mr X said he was hoping to achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because the Council has waived the £10 fee.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman