Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a complaint about a planning matter. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council dealt with his complaint about a planning matter. He says the complaint response was written by a person involved with the issues complained about and was therefore not impartial.

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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, 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 Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

Final decision

4. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we have decided not to investigate the substantive matter complained about and will not usually use public resources to consider more minor issues such as complaint handling as a standalone issue. The injustice suffered because of any alleged fault with the Council’s complaint handling would also not be significant enough to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman