Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision not to waive library fees Miss X had incurred at a Council library. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council will not agree to waive library fines she incurred after she was unable to use an app to renew her overdue books.

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.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
 

3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X complained to the Council in November 2023 because it would not agree to waive library fees she incurred when books she had borrowed became overdue. Miss X said she had trouble using the Council’s library app and this was why she did not renew them. Miss X was unhappy the Council would not waive the fees this caused as she said the Council had waived them in the past after she had called it to explain what happened. She also complained that the app was not showing the correct charges she owed, and that the Council had sent her someone else’s details after she complained.
7. The Council did not uphold Miss X’s complaint. The Council said Miss X could have renewed the books over the phone or by using the Council’s website. The Council also consulted with its IT department and did not find evidence of any glitches or system issues which would have prevented Miss X from using the app at the time. The Council informed Miss X she had begun to accrue library fines from February 2023 and the correct charges were not added to the outstanding balance until she returned the books in June 2023.
8. Miss X wants us to find the Council at fault. The evidence shows the Council has conducted a thorough investigation and there is nothing to suggest the app was not working. The Council provided Miss X with several other methods she could have used to renew the books and it has given her a reasonable explanation for the outstanding balance shown on the app. The Council is under no obligation to waive valid charges and as there is no evidence of wrongdoing on the Council’s part, an investigation into this matter would be unlikely to result in a finding of fault.
9. Miss X has also complained that the Council sent her information relating to another person during its handling of her complaint. The information commissioner’s office (ICO) was set up to investigate complaints regarding personal data. It is open to Miss X to refer the matter to the ICO if she remains unhappy with this aspect of her complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman