Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr Q’s complaint about the Council’s threat to implement its unreasonable complainant policy. It is unlikely we would find fault. And it would not be a good use of public resources to investigate the Council’s refusal to investigate a complaint about the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I have called Mr Q, complained that North Somerset Council has threatened to implement its unreasonable complainant policy against him. He also complained the Council refused to deal with a complaint about the matter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information Mr Q provided. I considered the information available on a previous complaint from Mr Q. I invited Mr Q to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

What happened

5. Mr Q has made a number of complaints to the Council.
6. Mr Q asked the Council for copies of the records it held about him. The records the Council sent Mr Q included an email exchange in which officers discussed the possibility of implementing the Council’s unreasonable complainant policy. They thought Mr Q took up a lot of Council time over matters it had already responded to. The Council later wrote to Mr Q saying it may choose to implement the policy in future. It has not done so yet.
7. Mr Q complained to the Council about the email exchange and its threat to use the unreasonable complainant policy. The Council refused to deal with the complaint.
8. Mr Q complained to us. He is unhappy the Council has left the threat of implementing its unreasonable complainant policy hanging over him. And he is unhappy the Council did not respond to his complaint about the matter.

Assessment

9. We will not investigate this complaint.
10. The information provided shows the Council thought the frequency of Mr Q’s contact about matters it had already responded to was taking up too much officer time. It is unlikely we would find fault with the Council for warning Mr Q it was considering implementing its unreasonable complainant policy if it thought his contact was excessive.
11. Mr Q is unhappy the Council did not investigate his complaint about the matter. It would not be a good use of public resources to investigate this when we will not investigate the substantive issue Mr Q complained about.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr Q’s complaint for the reasons given in the Assessment.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman