Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of library staff. This is because it is unlikely we can add to the investigation already carried out by the Council and the complainant has not suffered a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about the conduct of library staff. He says he has been bullied by the staff which makes him feel anxious about going to the library, and wants staff to receive training.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X made complained to the Counil about the conduct of staff at his local library. He says they talk too loudly, asked him to leave a desk, knocked on a door while he was using the toilet and spoke to him after he asked someone to move from a computer desk.
6. In its responses to Mr X’s complaints, the Council said it is normal practice for staff to check toilets close to the library closing time to ensure nobody got locked in. The Council said the desk Mr X was asked not to use was permanently allocated to Citizens Advice staff, and that its expects people to wait until desks are free rather than asking people to move. The Council said it would remind staff about keeping noise levels down.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has reminded staff about noise levels and explained to him why action was taken in relation to the other elements of his complaint. I therefore do not consider that there is anything more that the Ombudsman could add to these responses from the Council.
8. Furthermore, whilst it is clear that Mr X feels that he has been treated unfairly by the staff, I do not consider that any of the actions described by him would cause him a significant enough personal injustice to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot add to the Council’s investigation and he has not suffered a significant personal injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman