Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council classified Mr X as vexatious. Any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council wrongly:
• classified him as vexatious, and
• shared information about him with the NHS.
2. Mr X says this caused him significant distress and anxiety. He wants an apology and compensation for distress and for the Council to carry out various service improvements.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint unless we are satisfied the organisation knows about the complaint and has had an opportunity to investigate and reply. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to notify the organisation of the complaint and give it an opportunity to investigate and reply. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(5), section 34(B)6)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The Council classified Mr X as vexatious. Shortly afterwards, it withdrew this designation because it did not carry out an Equality Impact Assessment (EIA) at the time it classed Mr X as vexatious. The Council said it would reconsider its decision after completing an EIA.
8. The Council later reinstated Mr X’s designation as vexatious. It explained why it had done so and said it would review its decision in 12 months. It provided Mr X with a single point of contact at the Council for Mr X to communicate with.
9. We will not investigate this complaint. Although there was some fault in the way the Council initially made its decision, this did not cause Mr X an injustice because when the decision was made correctly, the Council reached the same conclusion. And Mr X was, and remains, able to contact the Council through his single point of contact.
10. Mr X also complained the Council wrongly shared information with the NHS. Mr X has not received a final complaints response from the Council. He can return to us if he remains unhappy once he has received this.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman