Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s response to a complaint she made about a parish councillor. We will not investigate the complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X seeks.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Ms X, complains about the Council’s response to a complaint she made about a parish councillor. She says the Council did not take her complaint seriously and did not properly investigate it. As an outcome to her complaint Ms X says she wants the councillor to be held accountable for their negligence.

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, 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

3. In considering the complaint I reviewed the information provided by Ms X and the Council. I gave Ms X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what she said.

Back to top

What I found

4. Ms X complained to the Council about the actions of a parish councillor. The Council responded to Ms X to explain its role and that of the parish council in the matters complained about. Having had regard to the responsibilities of the parish council, and noting that the parish councillor was no longer acting in that role, the Council told her that no action would be taken against the councillor.
5. Dissatisfied with the Council’s response, Ms X complained to us.

Assessment

6. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate. As parish councils are not bodies which fall within our jurisdiction, we have no legal remit to investigate the conduct of parish councillors.
7. While we can investigate how a Principal authority (the Council) dealt with such a complaint we will not do so here. This is because the Council considered Ms X’s complaint and set out why it has no grounds to take action against the ex-parish councillor. An investigation by the Ombudsman would be unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X seeks.
8. In responding to my draft decision Ms X said she had been waiting for a further letter from the Council in reply to the comments she had made on its response to her complaint. While delayed, this response has now been sent to Ms X. It sets out in some detail the Council’s position in relation to the matters Ms X raised and why it does not have jurisdiction to pursue the complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council and we cannot achieve the outcome Ms X seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman