Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to Mr X’s Members’ Code of Conduct complaint. This is because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr X, complains the Council has taken no further action against a local councillor despite finding he had breached the Members’ Code of Conduct. He says this has caused distress for which he should be compensated.

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 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X, including the Council’s decision on Mr X’s Members’ Code of Conduct complaint.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X contacted a local councillor, Councillor Q, seeking assistance in connection with a housing matter. Councillor Q did not reply.
6. Mr X made a Members’ Code of Conduct complaint to the Council which found Councillor Q had breached the Code. In accordance with normal procedures, the Monitoring Officer discussed the case with the Independent Person and decided that while it was appropriate to remind Councillor Q of his duties and to suggest that he respond to Mr X’s contact and apologise for having failed to do so, it was not in the public interest to carry out a full investigation and that an informal remedy would be appropriate.
7. At the time Mr X complained to us, he had not received an apology from Councillor Q. However, his housing issue has since been resolved.
8. We do not offer a right of appeal against a council’s decision on member conduct complaints and, while we can consider if there was fault in the way a council considered the complaint, we will only investigate if there is sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement or we consider it in the public interest to do so.
9. In this case I have seen no evidence to suggest fault affected the Council’s decision in how to deal with this case. I do not know if Councillor Q has since apologised to Mr X but even if he has not, there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and injustice caused to Mr X to justify our involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find evidence of fault by the Council or injustice caused to Mr X sufficient to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman