Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the behaviour of two Council staff members who Mr X complained about. This is because the tests in our Assessment Code have not been met and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the behaviour of two Council staff members who were involved in a parking issue he had brought to its attention. He says one officer was rude to him during a phone conversation and the other officer did not exercise discretion when they visited him straight after visiting a neighbour involved in the parking issue.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (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 and the Council, including its response to the complaints.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X complained about the conduct of a staff member during a phone conversation he had with them. The Council apologised for any negative experience he had had with the officer and confirmed that the details of his complaint had been brought to the attention of the officer’s manager who would carry out an internal investigation and take any appropriate action. It explained as this was a personnel matter, he would not be informed of the outcome.
6. Mr X also complained about the actions of an officer who he felt had failed to take issues of anonymity and discretion into account when they visited Mr X straight after visiting a neighbour with whom an issue about parking had been raised. The Council responded to confirm why the officer had visited and the benefits of such visits but said officers would be asked to take additional care when visiting sites and updating residents, particularly when dealing with complaints from neighbouring properties.
7. We do not investigate every complaint we receive. While Mr X may not be satisfied with the outcome of his complaints to the Council, its response to both issues was appropriate and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code have not been met and there are insufficient grounds to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman