Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s use of its unreasonable behaviour policy to restrict contact with Ms X because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains the Council has restricted her contact to five email addresses. She says she has to pay for an advocate to contact the Council on her behalf. She wants the Council to provide documents in an accessible format.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal, or
• there is another body better placed to consider the complaint.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council used its unreasonable behaviour policy to restrict Ms X’s contact to five email addresses to protect staff from harassment. Ms X denies harassment.
6. The Council has reviewed its decision on two occasions and decided restrictions should remain in place. On each occasion, the Council wrote to Ms X to explain its decision.
7. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
8. The Council’s unreasonable behaviour policy says people subject to restrictions have a right of appeal. Ms X has not used her right of appeal. It may be appropriate for her to do so.
9. Ms X says she has been paying for an advocate to contact the Council on her behalf and complains the costs are unsustainable. The Council recommended a free advocacy service Ms X could use.
10. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
11. Ms X wants the Council to provide documents in accessible formats. The Council considered her request for ‘reasonable adjustments’ and explained which it agreed and which it did not.
12. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
13. In her complaint to us, Ms X also referred to a medical report which she said the Council had commissioned and which she alleged contained false information.
14. I understand Ms X has referred the matter to the Health and Care Professions Council (HCPC). We will not investigate the matter. The HCPC is better placed to consider Ms X’s complaint about the author of the report.
15. Ms X also said she wanted the Council to provide tuition for her daughter while she waited for a school place. We will not investigate the matter because there is no evidence Ms X has complained to the Council. The Council must have an opportunity to respond before we consider a complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman