Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to a report of trader misconduct. There is no worthwhile outcome achievable and no significant injustice to Mr X.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not do enough to investigate allegations of trader misconduct, after a bought a faulty motor vehicle from a motor trader in its area. He said this left him without consumer protection and the vehicle could have placed his family at risk.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained to the Council because it had failed to take steps to investigate a report about trader misconduct. He said the Council failed to properly investigate what he believed was a pattern of deception by a motor trader.
6. The Council responded to Mr X and outlined the steps it had taken, when it was first told about the case. It told him the case was being dealt with by another Authority, who had the same powers that it does. It also explained why it had decided to respond to one specific element relating to branding and that it had checked its local databases for other reports about the trader.
7. We will not investigate because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable. The Council has provided an explanation for its response, and we could not direct it to do anything beyond the actions it has already completed.
8. Additionally, there is no significant injustice to Mr X that it did not take further enforcement action. Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered significant personal injustice as a direct result of the actions or inactions of the organisation. This means we will normally only investigate a complaint where the complainant has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures.
9. The injustice Mr X describes about risk to his family and the faulty motor vehicle, is because of the trader’s actions and not the Council’s, all of which occurred after that event.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no worthwhile outcome achievable and no significant injustice to Mr X

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman