Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about names he says are spelt incorrectly on a local war memorial. This is because the complaint is late and there is not enough evidence the alleged fault has caused Mr X significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains about misspelt names on a local war memorial. Mr X wants the names correcting but the Council has refused his request.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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 or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X says he first contacted the Council in 2004 about misspelt names on a local war memorial. Mr X wants the names correcting. The Council has responded to complaints from Mr X but has refused his request. It says any changes would need to be “appropriately evidenced” and supported by living relatives. The Council says it has taken advice from the Commonwealth War Graves Commission.
7. The Ombudsman normally expects people to complain to us within twelve months of them becoming aware of a problem. We look at each complaint individually, and on its merits, considering the circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are good reasons to do so. I do not consider that to be the case here. I see no reason Mr X could not have complained much earlier, and so the exception at paragraph 3 applies to his complaint.
8. But even if Mr X’s complaint was not late, it is unlikely we would investigate. This is because in deciding which complaints to investigate, we need to consider if the alleged fault has caused the person complaining significant personal injustice. It is clear the issue at the heart of Mr X’s complaint is important to him. But the misspelt names do not relate to Mr X’s own relatives. His complaint to the Council instead flows from a subject in which Mr X simply has an interest in. On balance, there is not enough evidence of significant personal injustice to Mr X to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the complaint is late and there is not enough evidence the alleged fault has caused Mr X significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman