Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council failed to give adequate notice for the cancellation of the supply of products and services, so should pay the associated invoices. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. The Council has already proposed an appropriate remedy for the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, says the Council reneged on an agreement with minimal notice for the supply of products and services. He therefore thinks the Council should pay the two associated invoices.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. We use 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. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council, which included the Council’s complaint responses. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

4. In its Stage 2 complaint response, the Council agreed Mr X had reasonable grounds to expect it to pay the two invoices he had submitted, so it has now authorised the payment of these.
5. I consider this to be a satisfactory way to resolve Mr X’s complaint, so the Ombudsman will not start an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

6. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Council has proposed a satisfactory resolution.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman