Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s failure to provide relevant compliance information in an enforcement matter. This is because we cannot achieve a worthwhile outcome for the complainant.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mrs X, complains the Council has not fully addressed its failure to disclose relevant compliance information relating to a retrospective licence for posts erected outside of her property.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mrs X.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. Mrs X was given the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered her comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. In 2020, Mrs X received a letter from an Enforcement and Licensing Officer about the posts in front of her property. She says it was aggressive in tone and did not set out how she could obtain a licence for them.
7. Mrs X subsequently applied for a retrospective licence. After experiencing significant delay and a lack of communication, she was informed that approved specifications for the posts had since changed. Mrs X complained to the Council.
8. The Council upheld her complaint that it did not correctly advise on how to apply for a licence, acknowledged considerable delays in its communication, and granted retrospective approval for the posts.
9. Mrs X is dissatisfied with the response; she wants acknowledgement of poor standards by the Council, and a full explanation of the way it handled the investigation and why the officer failed to provide the relevant information in the initial letter.
10. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint. We recognise that, in her view, the Council’s intent was to fail to provide information and to cause her distress. She believes this warrants investigation. However, the remedy Mrs X is seeking has been partially achieved in that the Council has already recognised fault and apologised for its failure to meet expected standards of service. In the circumstances, investigation to try to establish the intent behind the identified fault would be disproportionate, and would not be a good use of our resources.
11. It is unlikely we will be able to add anything to the investigation already carried out. Therefore, there is no merit in the Ombudsman pursing the matter.
12. Mrs X has also requested, under the Freedom of Information Act, a copy of the standard Council approved template used for letters. As this relates to access to information, the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed than the Ombudsman to investigate it.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely an investigation will achieve what the complainant wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman