Summary: Mr X complained about how the Council unfairly escalated his Level 1 verbal warning to a Level 2 written warning and how it revoked his extended access service to his local library. There were some faults by the Council which caused injustice to Mr X. The Council will take action to remedy the injustice caused.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about how the Council unfairly escalated his Level 1 verbal warning to a Level 2 written warning and how it revoked his extended access service to his local library following his violation of the library’s terms and conditions.
2. As a result, Mr X said he lost substantial access to the library facilities which he uses to perform his day-to-day tasks and it affected his standard of living.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in the decision making, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with an organisation’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

What I have and have not investigated

6. I have investigated matters from November 2023 to June 2024. This covers the period from when Mr X was reported to have first breached the library’s terms and conditions to when Mr X made his complaint to the Ombudsman.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke with Mr X and considered the information he and the Council provided about this complaint.
8. I sent Mr X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and considered all comments received before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Council’s Library Byelaws and Regulations

9. Section 16 – A person shall not engage in audible conversation in any part of the library set apart as a reference department or for reading after having been requested not to do so by a library officer.
10. Section 17 – A person shall not wilfully obstruct any library officer in the execution of his duty or wilfully disturb, obstruct, interrupt, or annoy any other person in the proper use of the library.
11. Section 22 – A person shall not, except with the consent of a library officer partake of refreshment in the library, except in any part thereof which is for the time being used as a restaurant or in which, when it is being used for an educational, cultural or other event under section 20 of the Act, the Library Authority allows the partaking of refreshments.
12. Every person who, within the view of a library officer contravenes any of the foregoing Byelaws may be excluded or removed from the library by such an officer if:

• ….. from the nature of the contravention or from any other fact of which the officer may have knowledge or be credibly informed there is reasonable ground for belief that the person’s continuance in the library may result in another contravention of the Byelaws or that the person’s exclusion or removal from the library is otherwise necessary for the proper use and regulation thereof.

Council’s libraries extended access terms and conditions

13. Customers must treat the building, its contents and other customers using the service with respect at all times.
14. Extended Access are privileges in addition to the library’s normal hours of staffed operation.
15. Extended Access service is provided at the discretion of the library and this service may be revoked and/or customer’s permission to use Extended Access terminated with immediate effect.

Key events

16. Mr X attends his local library regularly. Mr X said he uses the library facilities to perform his day-to-day tasks.
17. Between November 2023 and February 2024, the Council said Mr X breached the library’s terms and conditions which included:

• taking loud telephone calls
• eating soup and smelly food
• inconsiderate use of library/study space
• leaving behind valuables in the library.

18. Due to Mr X’s violation of the library’s terms and conditions, he was issued with a Level 1 verbal warning in January 2024. Mr X was also provided with a copy of the library’s byelaws and regulations.
19. The Council said Mr X further breached the library’s terms and conditions on two occasions in late January and early February. The Council said Mr X made a loud telephone call and left items unattended for long periods to reserve a space in the library respectively. The Council considered Mr X’s various breaches and on 28 February 2024, it issued Mr X with a Level 2 written warning and his extended access to the library was revoked. Mr X continued to be able to access the library services but only during staffed hours of operation.
20. Between March and May, Mr X continued to breach the library’s terms. The Council said Mr X continued to bring in smelly food into the library and he inappropriately used the library power outlets by charging various devices at the same time.
21. In April, Mr X made a formal complaint to the Council. Mr X said after he received the Level 1 verbal warning, he adhered to the library’s rules and regulations. Mr X said he had not committed any further breaches, so he questioned why the Council escalated his Level 1 warning to Level 2 and why it revoked his extended access to the library. Mr X also stated there were no provisions in the library byelaws relating to the appropriate use of the library’s power outlets and the number of devices people are allowed to charge.
22. In its responses to Mr X’s complaint, the Council said:

• there was evidence to support there had been an ongoing pattern of inappropriate behaviour by Mr X which resulted in Level 1 verbal warning, and it referred Mr X to sections 17 and 22 of the library byelaws and regulations.
• it reserves the rights to revoke a person’s extended access at any time.
• when it issued Mr X with the Level 1 warning, it had considered whether it was necessary to revoke his extended access at the time, but it decided not to. It said that was because it considered Mr X’s behaviour were low-risk and decided to give him an opportunity to change his behaviour.
• Mr X continued to breach the library’s rules (in late January and early February) after he received a Level 1 warning. It explained that was why Mr X’s warning was escalated to Level 2 written warning and his extended access was revoked in line with its policy.
• further breaches were recorded against Mr X after he received his Level 2 warning and therefore, it decided to uphold the Level 2 warning and that his extended access rights will not be reinstated.
• it would not review the matter further and if Mr X continued to breach the library’s terms and conditions, it would result in a full six-month library ban for Mr X.

23. Mr X remained dissatisfied with the Council’s responses, and he made a complaint to the Ombudsman. Mr X maintained he did not breach the library rules after he was issued with the Level 1 warning because he had travelled out of the country for six weeks during that period. Mr X was out of the country from 11 February to 24 March 2024.

Analysis

24. Councils are entitled to restrict/revoke access to facilities or buildings, if this is done with good reason and officers have followed and applied the proper process. The council should explain its reasons for a ban/revocation and the affected person should be given an opportunity to appeal a ban. The council should also clearly explain the length of time the ban will be in place for and explain when it will review the ban. The Ombudsman generally considers that councils should not impose open-ended bans with no meaningful review to reflect possible changes in circumstances. Bans should be reviewed within a reasonable period, and if the council decides a ban should stay in place, it should explain why it has decided not to lift it.
25. In this case, the Council issued a Level 1 and 2 warnings to Mr X and revoked his extended access rights to his local library in line with its library byelaws and it extended access terms and conditions. This was due to the repeated breaches of the library’s rules by Mr X over a considerable period. This was not fault.
26. I note Mr X disputed he further breached the library’s rules in the late January and early February following his Level 1 verbal warning. Mr X said this was because he travelled out of the country and questioned how the Council escalated his warning to Level 2 and revoked his extended access. The two incidents which resulted in Mr X’s warning escalation happened before the period Mr X travelled out of the country. Therefore, I do not find the Council unfairly escalated Mr X’s warning.
27. However, there was no evidence to show the Council clearly explained the length of time Mr X’s ban would last for when it revoked his extended access to the library. This was fault. The Council should have informed Mr X when it would review the revocation of his extended access and that the sanction should not be open‑ended. This caused uncertainty to Mr X in not knowing whether his extended access will ever be reinstated.
28. But the Council explained its reasons for issuing Mr X with the penalties and it considered/reviewed the Level 2 warning and the extended access revocation under its complaint process. The Council decided not to reduce the Level 2 warning and not to reinstate Mr X’s extended access due to his continued breaches of the library’s rules and regulations. These were not faults. The Ombudsman 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.
29. As regards, the incident where Mr X was reported to have inappropriately used the library power outlets by charging various devices at the same time, there was no evidence in the Council’s library byelaws and/or its terms and conditions which addressed this matter. This amounts to fault and caused Mr X uncertainty as to the library’s rules in relation to using its charging outlets. I find there should be clear regulations and signage in the library which states whether people are allowed to charge their personal devices or not. This will ensure people are fully aware of what they can and cannot do.

Back to top

Agreed action

30. To remedy the injustice caused by the faults identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following within one month of the final decision:

• apologise in writing to Mr X in recognition of the uncertainty caused to him by the Council’s failure to specify the length of his extended access revocation and the uncertainty caused by his use of the library’s charging outlets. The apology should be in accordance with our guidance, Making an effective apology
• inform Mr X when the Council will next review his extended access revocation.

31. Within two months of the final decision, the Council should review its library rules and regulations to include:
1. the length of time a person’s extended access revocation will be in place for
2. the process and timescale the Council will review an extended access revocation
3. provisions relating to the use of its libraries’ charging outlets and whether people are allowed to charge their personal devices.
32. Within two months of the final decision, the Council should include the above information (paragraph 31, points ‘a’ and ‘b’) in the letters it issues to individuals about extended access revocations which will provide them with clear understanding of the process.
33. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

34. I find some evidence of faults by the Council leading to injustice and the Council has agreed to take action to remedy the injustice caused.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman