Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with concerns about the behaviour of a parish councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, complained about the behaviour of a parish councillor. Mr X says the councillor used unacceptable language and shouted at him. Mr X says this caused him considerable distress. Mr X is unhappy with the response the Council’s Monitoring Officer sent him.

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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of parish councils. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34A, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Local Authorities have a duty to designate a Monitoring Officer. The Monitoring Officer must ensure the authority, its officers and members maintain the highest standards of conduct.
6. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about alleged breaches of the councillor’s code of conduct. But the Monitoring Officer will normally consider the complaint to decide if the jurisdictional tests and local assessment criteria are met and if further action is needed. If the Monitoring Officer decides not to take further action, they will contact the complainant and give reasons for their decision.
7. We cannot investigate complaints about parish councils. The Council is also not responsible for the actions of a parish council. But we can consider a district council’s handling of a code of conduct complaint if it is about a parish councillor. However, where a decision has been made in line with the correct procedure, taking account of the relevant evidence, we will generally not criticise the decision, even if the complainant does not agree with it.
8. In this case, I am satisfied the Monitoring Officer dealt with the matter in line with the Council’s rules for code of conduct complaints before deciding not to take further action. The Monitoring Officer found there had been a minor breach of its code of conduct. They decided that because the councillor had apologised during a public meeting, no further action was needed. In line with the Council’s policy, the Monitoring Officer consulted one of the Council’s Independent Persons about their decision.
9. I understand Mr X is unhappy with the Monitoring Officer’s response. But they considered Mr X’s complaint in line with the Council’s policy and explained their decision. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation.

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman