Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of a councillor. This is because the complainant has not been caused any significant injustice.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained a councillor failed to respond to his correspondence or answer his questions. Mr X has also complained about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with his complaint about the matter.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Local Authorities have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer to ensure the lawfulness and fairness of authority decision making. The Monitoring Officer must ensure that the authority, its officers and members maintain the highest standards of conduct.
6. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches. In this case, the Monitoring Officer will consider the complaint and decide if the matter meets the essential criteria for consideration under the code of conduct complaints procedure. If the Monitoring Officer decides the criteria is not met, the complaint will be rejected and the complainant informed.
7. The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We can only look at how the complaint was considered. We are also unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the councillor complained about.
8. After considering Mr X’s complaint, the Monitoring Officer decided not to take any further action as the issues complained about would not be a breach of the code of conduct. I understand Mr X may not agree, but this was a decision the Monitoring Officer was entitled to make.
9. The Council did not inform Mr X of its decision as it should have. This is fault. However, I cannot say Mr X has been caused any significant injustice as a result. Although he would have been put to some trouble chasing the Council’s response to his complaint, this would not be significant enough to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman. The councillor Mr X originally complained about has also now provided Mr X with a response to his questions.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has not been caused significant injustice because of the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman