Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his experience during wellbeing walks. This is because we could not add to the Council’s investigation or achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council unfairly excluded him from wellbeing walks, made biased and speculative remarks about him, spread false accusations, and blamed him for behaviour later confirmed as a reasonable adjustment. Mr X wants the comments retracted and for staff involved to face disciplinary action.

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 we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. When we find fault, we can recommend remedies for significant personal injustice, or to prevent future injustice, caused by that fault. We look at organisational fault, not individual professional competence. Decisions about individual’s fitness to practise or work are for the organisations concerned, and for professional regulators, not the Ombudsman. (Local Government Act 1974, s26(1) and s26A(1) as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complains that volunteers made prejudicial remarks, speculated his identity and made accusations against him during wellbeing walks, facilitated in part by the Council.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the Council’s investigation or achieve a worthwhile outcome. This because there is no independent evidence to confirm what was said to or about Mr X during wellbeing walks. In the absence of this, I am unable to reach a view and cannot say there has been fault on the part of the Council.
8. The Council’s complaint responses have included apologies for Mr X’s poor experience and have confirmed he is not excluded from attending future walks if he wishes to participate. We cannot achieve the other outcome that Mr X is seeking. It is for the Council and not the Ombudsman to decide whether staff are disciplined.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council or achieve the outcome he wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman