Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s cancellation policy for leisure centre classes. This is because an investigation would not achieve a meaningful outcome and the alleged fault has not caused Mr B a significant injustice.

The complain

1. Mr B complains the Council applies a cancellation charge when a leisure centre member cancels within four hours of the booked class, even when there are plenty of spaces available and there is a genuine reason for the cancellation. Mr B would like the Council to amend its cancellation policy so the charge is not applied in such circumstances and to make it clear when discretion will be used.

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:

• 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 do not start an investigation if we decide the impact of the fault a person complains about is not so significant that we should investigate. 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 by an organisation.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council has explained that it applies the cancellation charge to encourage members to cancel with as much notice as possible. But, when there is a genuine reason to cancel, discretion can be used not to apply this charge. The Council says genuine mitigating circumstances can be considered on a case by case basis and the Council has set out the factors it may take into account.
7. It is for the Council to decide its cancellation policy across its leisure centres. The Council has explained its policy and it is not our role to tell the Council it should operate this policy differently.
8. So, an investigation would not achieve a meaningful outcome.
9. And, the issue complained about has not caused Mr B a serious injustice which would justify public money being spent on an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because an investigation would not achieve a meaningful outcome, and Mr B has not suffered a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman