Cannock Chase District Council (25 020 593)
Category : Other Categories > Leisure and culture
Decision : Closed after initial enquiries
Decision date : 20 Apr 2026
The Ombudsman's final decision:
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council continuing to ban him from his local leisure centre. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.
The complaint
- Mr X complains that he was banned from his local leisure centre. He asked if the ban could be lifted but the Council refused. Mr X says he has not been able to use the swimming pool for two years.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
- 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))
- We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
- I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
- I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
- Mr X complains about the circumstances which led to him being banned from the leisure centre two years ago. We cannot investigate this as there is no good reason why Mr X could not have complained to us about this sooner.
- In 2025, Mr X wrote to the Council and asked it to consider allowing him to use the facilities again. The Council agreed with the response given by the leisure provider that a permanent ban would remain in place due to Mr X’s behaviour over the last five years.
- I will not investigate this complaint. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council, and the leisure provider acting on its behalf, acted in line with its policy. It has the right to restrict access to facilities where there are good reasons, and it followed the correct process. It has a duty to its staff and other service users.
Final decision
- We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman