Summary: We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint about the Council charging for overdue library books when he did not receive the usual email reminder. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. And, Mr B has not suffered a serious or significant injustice which would justify an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr B says for the last ten years the Council has sent an email reminder when library books are due back. Mr B says he has used this reminder to help him return books on time. Mr B says he recently did not receive this reminder which resulted in three books becoming overdue. Mr B says the Council has wrongly charged him a £15 fee for the late return of these books and has refused to cancel this fee.

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 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))

3. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council says these reminder emails are courtesy emails only. The Council says it is stated in the library membership form and in the reminder emails that a library user should not rely on these emails as the sole method of remembering due dates, and non-delivery or non-receipt of these emails will not oblige a library to waive any overdue charges.
7. The Council’s decision not to issue a refund to Mr B was in line with this information. So, there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation into this complaint.
8. And, the £15 late return fee Mr B has been charged is not a significant or serious injustice which would justify public money being spent on an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify an investigation. And, the alleged fault has not caused Mr B a significant or serious injustice which would justify public money being spent on an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman