Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s marketing of a local function hall nor its contract with a private trader. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault and there is no evidence of significant injustice to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to consider the impact to the local market in marketing a local function hall as a wedding venue. He also complains the Council has not been transparent with its business practices and has entered into a contract with a private operator which misuses public funds.

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 Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained the Council has marketed a local function hall for use as a wedding venue and it has not properly considered the impact of this to local businesses. He further complained the Council has entered into a contract with a private trader that is invalid and misuses public funds. In addition, he said the Council had not been transparent about its business practices.
6. The Council did not uphold Mr X’s complaint and explained the venue is available for a number of uses and its contract with the private trader is lawful. The Council disagreed it has not been transparent and confirmed it was not using public funds inappropriately.
7. Mr X remains unhappy with the Council’s actions and wants us to find it fault. The evidence shows there is no statutory requirement for the Council to survey the local market when hiring out public spaces but it must be transparent about its pricing structures. The Council’s website and local hire terms and conditions make this information clear and the Council has provided Mr X with a reasonable explanation for its business practices. There is no evidence of fault in its contract with the private trader and there is no evidence that these matters has caused a clear and ongoing significant injustice to Mr X. An investigation into this matter would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions or significant injustice incurred by Mr X.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault and there is no evidence of significant injustice to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman