Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about rent increases for beach huts. Ms X can take the matter to court, and it is reasonable to expect her to do so.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained that the Council’s rent increase for beach huts is unreasonable.
2. Ms X also said that the Council did not make the details of its external benchmarking exercise public. Ms X said that this is unlawful.
3. Ms X also said that the Council failed to follow its policy by preventing her from speaking at a cabinet meeting for up to three minutes.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
5. 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.
6. 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 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

7. I considered information provided by Ms X and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The rent change dispute is a disagreement about the terms of a legal contract which is in force between the Council and Ms X. There is likely to either be a legal remedy, or the contract may specify what happens in the event of a dispute.
10. We will not investigate this aspect of Ms X’s complaint. This is because disputes over a legal contract are for the courts, where both parties are able to access the court process. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to seek a legal remedy.
11. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed than us to consider Ms X’s complaint regarding the Council making information publicly available. We will therefore not investigate this aspect of her complaint.
12. Because we are not investigating the substantive element of Ms X’s complaint, there is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice to justify us investigating her complaint about how the Council’s cabinet meeting was conducted.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because she can take the matter to court, and it is reasonable to expect Ms X to do this.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman