Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Ms B’s complaint that a Fire and Rescue Service (F&RS) member of staff is putting the service at risk by his behaviour. This is because the Ombudsman cannot investigate personnel matters. He will not investigate Ms B’s complaint about the way the F&RS has considered her complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Ms B says the Fire and Rescue Service (F&RS) should reopen her complaint and consider her evidence regarding the behaviours of one of its staff. Ms B says she has been ill so she should be allowed to submit her evidence now.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the F&RS, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Ms B and the F&RS provided. I sent Ms B a copy of my draft decision for comment.

Back to top

What I found

5. Ms B contacted the F&RS in September concerned about the actions of one of its members of staff. Ms B was given a deadline to provide the evidence she says she has about the staff member.
6. The F&RS say Ms B was wrongly given a deadline of 14 November to provide her evidence. It emailed her on 17 October to explain the notification she had previously received should have read 14 October not 14 November and apologised for the confusion.
7. Ms B was advised because of the mistake it would extend the deadline until 21 October. Ms B confirmed receipt of the email and confirmed she will submit her evidence by that date.
8. Ms B failed to submit her evidence by the 21 October. The F&RS sent her an email on 22 October advising it will consider the matter without her evidence. Ms B responded to the email the same day apologising that she had mixed up the dates and asked for a further extension until 28 October. The F&RS agreed to extend the deadline for Ms B to submit her evidence until 25 October. The F&RS received no further communication from Ms B and considered the allegations she raised without the evidence she said she had and closed the case.
9. Ms B says she had been ill and asked the Ombudsman to tell the F&RS to reopen her complaint and consider her evidence. As explained the allegations were considered without the evidence as Ms B failed to meet the deadline to provide it. There is no fault with the actions of the F&RS warranting an Ombudsman investigation.
10. If Ms B has evidence that someone is putting the health and safety of the public at risk and committing a crime she can contact the police. The Ombudsman cannot investigate personnel matters or discipline staff.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman