Maldon District Council (19 019 563)

Category : Planning > Other

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 30 Mar 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the information presented by the Council to two Committees in 2016. This is because the alleged fault by the Council has not caused the complainant a significant personal injustice.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr B, says the District Council provided incorrect information, about the benefits of a proposed County Council flood alleviation scheme, to two of its Committees in 2016.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 who complained, or
  • the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I have considered:
    • Mr B’s complaint to the Ombudsman, and the accompanying appendices;
    • The 2018 report to the Council, for an amended flood alleviation scheme.
  2. I also gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on a draft version of this statement.

Back to top

What I found

Summary of what happened

  1. In 2016, reports were presented to the Council’s Planning and Licensing Committee and the Community Services Committee. The reports sought approval in principle for a County Council flood alleviation scheme to be constructed on District Council land. Mr B says the reports misled members into supporting the proposal by exaggerating the number of properties that would be protected from flooding by it.
  2. I understand concerns were raised about the impact of the original scheme on some allotments, so an alternative proposal was produced. A report for this amended scheme was presented to the full Council in 2018, again seeking approval in principle for the District Council land to be used.

Assessment

  1. I appreciate Mr B thinks the Committee Members were provided with inaccurate information in 2016.
  2. But, with reference to paragraph 2 above, I do not see that this alleged fault causes Mr B a significant personal injustice, because I understand the scheme considered in 2016 is not being proceeded with, and a new decision was taken in 2018.
  3. So, I do not consider the Ombudsman should investigate Mr B’s complaint, because he is not significantly affected by any fault in the 2016 decision.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaint. This is because the alleged fault by the Council has not caused him a significant personal injustice.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings