Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Mr X’s acceptable behaviour appeal. The claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council did not respond to his complaint and mistakenly considered his actions as vexatious.
2. Mr X said it caused distress and meant he could not make a complaint to the Council.

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), section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X made multiple complaints to the Council. The Council considered his actions as excessive and burdensome due to the volume and re-raising of matters already considered.
7. The Council said Mr X could not bring a new complaint for a six-month period, although he could raise service requests. The Council also said it would complete any existing complaints.
8. Mr X appealed its decision. The Council did not uphold his appeal and gave examples of where it considered his actions unreasonable.
9. The Council took the steps relating to Mr X’s restriction we would expect to see in line with our guidance on managing unreasonable actions by complainants.
10. 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. This is not the case here because he can raise service complaints and his existing complaints will be responded to. Therefore, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the claimed injustice is not significant enough to warrant our involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman