Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s city hall not being accessible and its poor customer service. This is because any personal injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s city hall not being accessible for her father, Mr Y and that the customer service was poor. It caused them frustration and inconvenience. Mrs X wants the Council to make improvements to the city hall and its service.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council’s city hall holds musical concerts and Mrs X’s father, Mr Y has attended several of them. Mrs X said her father is independently mobile, however does struggle to walk which affects his ability to enter and exit the city hall. Mrs X said she therefore attends the concerts with him.
6. Mrs X complained to the Council about a recent concert they attended. She said staff failed to provide appropriate assistance for her father when they attended a concert at the city hall. She said there were delays accessing the building, poor communication about the lift and they missed the start of the pre-concert talk. She also complained about waiting for the lift after the concert and the poor condition of the disabled toilet.
7. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint and said it accepted there were no staff available to assist when Mrs X and Mr Y arrived and that staff gave inconsistent information about the lift. It explained why seating could not be provided near the lift, acknowledged staff could have shown more empathy, referred the concerns to the relevant teams and credited Mrs X’s account for future bookings.
8. We usually investigate complaints where the complainant has experienced serious harm or distress as a direct result of the Council’s actions. We recognise the injustice caused to Mr Y and Mrs X however, we do not consider it to be significant enough to warrant an investigation.
9. In any case, the Council’s response was appropriate and subsequently, we could not add to it.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because any personal injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman