Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a notice to marry appointment. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, and there is a court remedy available to Mr X and Mrs Y.

The complaint

1. Mr X and Mrs Y complained the Council would not continue with their notice to marry appointment because they did not have the information it needed. Mr and Mrs Y regard this as a breach of the Equality Act 2010.
2. Mr X and Mrs Y also complained about the conduct of the registrar who handled their appointment, and the handling of their complaint was poor. Mr X and Mrs Y asked the Council to allocate a different registrar for any alternative appointment.
3. Mr X and Mrs Y said this caused distress.
4. Mr X and Mrs Y want the Council to ensure its guidance about notice to marry appointments provides accurate information and recognise its failings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
6. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mr X, Mrs Y and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. When Mr X and Mrs Y attended an appointment with the registrar, they were told they did not have the correct information so the notice to marry declaration could not continue.
10. Mr X and Mrs Y said they were not informed of the specific information the Council needed, and so complained to it. Mr X and Mrs Y also complained about the conduct of the registrar who attended the appointment. Mr X and Mrs Y asked that a different registrar attend the rescheduled appointment.
11. The Council said it provides information on its website about requirements for notices to marry, and said that Mr X had sent some queries about requirements before the appointment which were responded to.
12. Given that Mr X and Mrs Y were able to reschedule their appointment with a different registrar, any injustice they experienced is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
13. The Ombudsman cannot decide if a council has breached the Equality Act 2010. Section 113 of the Act provides members of the public with recourse to the county court for damages claims, if they believe they have suffered unlawful discrimination. It is reasonable to expect Mr X and Mrs Y to take the matter to court.
14. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we decide not to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X and Mrs Y’s complaint because any injustice experienced is not significant enough to justify our involvement, and there is a court remedy available to them.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman