Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council's handling of a further complaint about library services. This is because there is insufficient evidence of significant personal injustice and further investigation is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to investigate a complaint he submitted recently. He says the complaint raised new matters, including the Council's alleged failure to respond to an email sent recently and several operational and safety concerns about library services. He says the Council wrongly treated these matters as part of an earlier complaint and refused to investigate them separately. He wants the Council to investigate the matters and provide a full response.

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
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))#

3. We will not usually investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34B(8))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complains the Council failed to investigate a further complaint he submitted and did not respond to an earlier email reporting additional library incidents. He says the Council wrongly treated these matters as part of an earlier complaint rather than considering them separately.
7. The later complaint raised concerns about library operations, anti-social behaviour, staffing, facilities, signage and access arrangements. The Council considered the later correspondence and explained it did not intend to reopen the complaint process because it considered the issues had already been addressed through its complaints process and reviewed by the Ombudsman.
8. To the extent Mr X is asking us to investigate the underlying concerns about library services, many of the issues are similar to matters previously raised through the Council's complaints process and considered by the Ombudsman. We are unlikely to achieve a different outcome by investigating similar concerns again.
9. Mr X says the Council failed to properly consider his later complaint and correspondence. We will not investigate the Council's complaint handling. We do not usually investigate complaint handling where we are not investigating the substantive issues complained about. This is because there is not usually enough personal injustice arising from complaint handling alone to justify an investigation. Further investigation would not be a proportionate use of public resources.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of significant personal injustice arising from the matters complained about. Further investigation is unlikely to achieve a worthwhile outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman