Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about leisure centre membership fees and additional costs. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault or significant enough injustice to warrant investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that he was given misleading information by leisure centre staff in relation to membership fees and further costs for guest users. Mr X also complained about the Council’s response to his complaint.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. Mr X says he was advised by leisure centre staff to take out a level of membership (‘Gold’ membership), which would save him money based on his regular use of facilities.
5. Mr X says he learned of certain limitations associated with this membership which he says meant he would have been paying more than before. When Mr X became aware of this, he cancelled his membership.
6. Mr X says he complained to the Council and was dissatisfied with the time it took the Council to respond.
7. The Council has apologised for the delay in responding and has told Mr X that it is satisfied that leisure centre staff have followed the terms and conditions of membership.
8. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. Investigating would not tell us, even on balance of probability, what leisure centre staff told Mr X originally because there is no record of it. It was open to Mr X to read the terms and conditions of membership before subscribing to it, as is reasonable to expect of any prospective buyer of good or services.
9. There is also not enough evidence of significant injustice to Mr X, as he cancelled his leisure centre membership once he became aware of the associated costs.
10. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we have decided not to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or of significant enough injustice to warrant it.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman