Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the way the Council investigated a report of physical assault relating to one of its employees. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains the Council’s employee abused him and physically assaulted him. He complains the Council failed to investigate his report properly and sought to cover up the matter. He says the Council did not take his concerns seriously and this impacted on his mental wellbeing. Mr B wants the Council to act to discipline its employee, share information and apologise to him.

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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, 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 B reported an incident to the Council which related to one of its employees. He told the Council he had received threats from its employee and then two weeks later the person abused him and physically assaulted him. Mr B said he felt Council officers had not taken his concerns seriously and had failed to investigate the matter.
6. The Council replied to the complaint and confirmed it had taken Mr B’s report seriously as it had formally investigated the matter. Despite the seriousness of the allegations the Council said it could not share the outcome of its disciplinary process with Mr B because it was a confidential staff matter. The Council apologised for any distress caused to Mr B but reassured him it had investigated the report.
7. Mr B remained dissatisfied with the Council’s response and asked it to escalate his complaint to stage two.
8. The Council provided a further response to Mr B and said it was satisfied it had taken Mr B’s complaint seriously. The Council apologised again for any upset and frustration Mr B had experienced. It said it had completed an investigation but could not share the outcome of the disciplinary process.
9. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council. The Council has provided a satisfactory response to Mr B following its investigation. It cannot share confidential information which relates to its employee disciplinary processes. We cannot add to the investigation already completed by the Council.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman