Surrey County Council (24 002 920)

Category : Other Categories > Other

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 07 Oct 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about delays in a coronial process, or the actions of a coroner’s officer, because they are not an administrative function of the Council. Nor will we consider the suitability of a remedy the Council offered Miss X, because it is not a good use of our time to consider complaints about complaint procedures where we are not looking at the substantive issues.

The complaint

  1. Miss X complained she was unhappy with delays and poor communication during coronial proceedings. Miss X this caused her unnecessary additional stress at an already difficult time. Miss X also said she did not believe the Council’s offer of a symbolic remedy was sufficient.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We cannot investigate complaints about actions which are not the administrative function of a council. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(1) as amended)
  2. The courts have said we can decide not to investigate a complaint about any action by an organisation concerning a matter which the law says we cannot investigate. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration [2006] EHWCC 2847 (Admin))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by Miss X and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Miss X complained to the Council about the length of time it took for a coroner to carry out their duties, as well as a lack of communication with a coroner’s officer. Miss X said this meant she was unable to make funeral arrangements until short notice. The Council apologised for delays Miss X had experienced and made her an offer of a symbolic financial remedy to recognise her distress.
  2. A coroner’s duties and functions under the 2009 Act remain the coroner’s despite being appointed and paid by the council and coroner’s officers being provided by the council. When undertaking tasks on behalf of a coroner as part of the coroner’s statutory functions relating to coronial investigations, coroner’s officers are exercising the coroner’s functions, not those of the council.
  3. Because of this, I cannot investigate the actions of the coroner’s officer or consider this matter further. Because we are not investigating the substantive matter, I won’t consider how the Council dealt with Miss X’s complaint, including the suitability of the offer the Council made, to remedy her uncertainty.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because coronial duties are not an administrative function of the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings