Summary: X complains the Council has failed in its public sector duty and failed to scrutinise how its money is spent in supporting organisations which do not properly support trans people equality. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as X, says the Council is failing in its public duty by funding an organisation without properly addressing concerns that a member of that organisation is expressing transphobic comments. X says the organisation is not equally open to all clients and X cannot rely on Council supported services not to discriminate against trans people.

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, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by X, including the Council’s response to the complaint.

Back to top

What I found

4. The Council part funds two organisations, Organisation A and Organisation B. Both organisations are governed by Trustees and are funded from multiple sources.
5. Y, an employee of Organisation A, has made comments which X says shows Y is opposed to trans equality.
6. X complained to the Council that Y has made comments which are contrary to Y’s employer’s charitable objectives. X has also made a complaint to Organisation Y about this but has not made a formal complaint to the Charity Commission.
7. The Council considered X’s complaint but found no evidence that either organisation had acted contrary to their charitable objectives and that such a complaint should be made to the Charity Commission. It found no evidence that either organisation had breached the terms of any funding agreement with the Council. It also found no evidence that Y had made any inappropriate comments while attending Council Equality Panel meetings.
8. Dissatisfied with the Council’s response, and that it did not properly address the complaint about Organisation B, X complained to the Ombudsman.

Assessment

9. X says it is distressing that a charity, which receives Council support, is not supporting trans people as it should and that the Council should work with the two organisations to make sure they are open to trans people and treat trans equality seriously.
10. While I understand X has been upset by some comments made by Y, X has not presented any evidence to the Council which would require it to take action. X has presented no evidence to the Council which would lead it to decide that either organisation has breached their contractual obligations and it has properly advised X to take their complaint to the Trustees of the organisations involved and the Charity Commission.
11. In the absence of evidence of fault by the Council, I see no grounds which warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

12. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman