Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint as he is unlikely to find fault in the way the Council dealt with his complaint that two councillors breached its code of conduct

The complaint

1. Mr X complains for himself and for his neighbours, Mr & Mrs Y and Mrs Z. He complains the Council refuses to investigate complaints that two councillors breached its code of conduct.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by maladministration and service failure. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe the fault has not caused injustice to the person/s who complained.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information provided by Mr X and the Council. Mr X, Mr & Mrs Y and Mrs Z had the opportunity to comment on the draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr X complained to the Council that two councillors had breached its code of conduct:
• Councillor A had failed to advise a planning officer that he knew the applicant when he asked a planning officer to refer a planning application to the planning sub-committee if the officer was recommending refusal
• Councillor A had failed to declare a non-pecuniary interest relating to a friendship with a with a planning applicant during a planning sub-committee meeting
• Councillor B, when acting as the chairperson of the planning sub-committee, conferred an advantage on Councillor A
6. The Monitoring Officer decided the complaint fell within the jurisdiction of the Standards Committee Assessment Sub-Committee. She prepared a report on each allegation which included an overview of the complaint.
7. The sub-committee considered the complaints and the reports. It made the following decisions:
• No further action about Councillor A. The Council’s constitution says a councillor must give a reason when asking that an application is referred to the planning sub-committee. A councillor is not required to advise the planning officer about interest or personal connection with a planning applicant.
• No further action for Councillor B because Mr X had not included any information in his complaint that suggested the Councillor had acted inappropriately when chairing the planning committee.
• No further action in respect of Councillor A. Because although the applicant and Councillor were ‘friends’ on Facebook, this did not automatically mean they has a close association which required him to declare a non-pecuniary interest. The sub-committee also noted that even if a Councillor declares a non-pecuniary interest, they are still entitled to take part in the debate and vote on the planning application.
8. Having considered the complaints and followed the published procedures, these are decisions the Council is entitled to make

Assessment

9. The Localism Act 2011 says councils must have a Code of Conduct for elected Councillors. They must also have a process in place to consider allegations that a Councillor has not complied with the Code.
10. East Riding of Yorkshire Council has a process or procedure for dealing with complaints made about elected and co-opted members (the process).
11. I am satisfied the Council investigated Mr X’s complaint in line with the process. It considered all the information provided by Mr X.
12. The Council decided there was not enough evidence to support the allegation the Councillor had breached the Code of Conduct. It decided not to take any further action.
13. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong because a complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. Without evidence of fault in how the Council reached its decision, I cannot question the decision made

Back to top

Final decision

14. I will not investigate this complaint. I have not seen any evidence of fault in the way the Council considered their complaints that two councillors breached the code of conduct.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman