Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to ensure a historic crane was replaced by a contractor that mislaid the original. There is insufficient evidence of injustice caused to the complainant.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council’s contractor did not replace a historic crane by the canal. He says it mislaid the original while it carried out works on the site. He says the Council’s failure to ensure the crane’s replacement means a significant part of the canal’s history has gone. He says the Council’s failure to respond to his complaint properly and take action has caused him some distress. He wants the Council to place either a replica crane, or an information board informing people of the site’s history.

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 injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (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.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says the Council has failed to ensure a contractor replaces a historic crane that it mislaid while carrying out works by the canal. He says he pursued the Council for two years about the matter, but it has failed to resolve it.
6. 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 by an organisation. In addition, we will not normally investigate a complaint where the complainant is using their enquiry as a way of raising a wider community campaign about something of general concern but where they have not suffered injustice.
7. In this case, Mr X says the personal injustice he experienced was related more to the Council’s lack of action when he had raised complaints about the matter. He says this caused him some distress. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence that Mr X experienced a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman