Torridge District Council (24 006 035)

Category : Other Categories > Other

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 19 Aug 2024

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of matters relating to Mr X’s postal address on its Street Numbering and Naming system. This is because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

  1. Mr X complains about attempts by Council staff to stop post being delivered to his premises. He says he was given false information and complains about the behaviour of officers involved.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate 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 continue 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, or
  • there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, including its response to the complaint.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Mr X complained to the Council about its handling of matters relating to his postal address. It explained that prior to his February 2024 application to list his address on its Street Numbering and Naming system, it was not aware that a postal service existed to his property. It confirmed it had had no involvement in the sudden cessation of delivery to his property and suggested he speak to Royal Mail about it. It found no fault in the way the Council had advised him that prior to his formal application, his address had not been officially registered for postal deliveries. It did acknowledge that initially he had been given some incorrect planning information and said that learning opportunities would be taken with regard to staff interaction with customers.
  2. We are funded by the public purse and have an obligation to use the funds allocated to us in an effective, efficient and economic manner. This means that we do not investigate every complaint we receive and while Mr X may not be satisfied with the outcome of the Council’s consideration of his complaint, there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because an investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or lead to a different outcome.

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