Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about what happened during a wedding. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council or injustice to the complainant. It is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mrs X, complained about various aspects of her recent wedding. Mrs X says she was only told the toilets and waiting room at the venue would be unavailable after she had paid for the ceremony. Mrs X also complained a car park was not available and she raised concerns about the layout and cleanliness of the venue. Mrs X was unhappy with how the celebrant dealt with a guest who arrived late. This led to the ceremony being paused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its responses to Mrs X’s complaint the Council said:
• The toilets and waiting room were both available.
• The car park Mrs X wanted to use was for staff. It had occasionally been used for wedding guests with mobility issues.
• It had changed the layout of the venue to facilitate social distancing.
• It did not have the resources to clean outside areas between ceremonies.
• Mrs X was given the opportunity to delay the start of the ceremony but decided not to. When the guest did arrive, the celebrant briefly stopped proceedings to ensure the guest was settled.
6. We will not start an investigation into Mrs X’s complaint. While I understand Mrs X is upset about what happened, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant us investigating. It has provided what I consider to be balanced and proportionate responses to her complaints.
7. There is a dispute about what was discussed regarding the guest arriving late and we could never say with confidence what happened. It is unlikely we would say the Council was at fault for pausing the ceremony while the guest was settled. The ceremony resumed after a brief delay and so any injustice is not significant enough to warrant an investigation. It is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault or injustice, and it is unlikely we could add anything to the Council’s response.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman