Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with a complaint about the conduct of councillors. This is because the complainant has not been caused any significant injustice and it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve anything more.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained about the behaviour of councillors during a planning committee meeting. Mr X says the members ignored planning rules and the planning officer’s advice. He says the councillors were biased and did not act in line with the member’s code of conduct. Mr X has also complained about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with his complaint.

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:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the council, 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 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 review the complaint and decide if it merits a formal investigation. The complaint will be resolved informally where possible and the Monitoring Officer will advise the complainant, in writing, of their decision.
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 councillors complained about.
8. After considering Mr X’s complaint, the Monitoring Officer decided the threshold for investigation had not been met and an informal resolution would be appropriate. The Monitoring Officer recommended the councillors attend a planning training session. I understand Mr X says further recommendations should also be made including the removal of one of the members from the planning committee. However, the Monitoring Officer was entitled to decide the resolutions that were appropriate.
9. There was a delay before the Council told Mr X the outcome of its assessment. However, I cannot say Mr X has been caused 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 Council has also apologised for the delay and it is unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve anything more for Mr X.

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. It is also unlikely an investigation by the Ombudsman would achieve anything more for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman