Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s consideration of a code of conduct complaint concerning the behaviour of three councillors at a planning committee meeting. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the way the Council made its decision, and the complainant has not been caused a significant injustice by the associated delay.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr W, complains about the comments and behaviour of three councillors during the consideration of an application at a planning committee meeting. The application was for a development adjacent to Mr W’s mother’s home, although he is not complaining on her behalf. Mr W says the councillors failed to maintain a sense of objectivity, were rude, dismissive, emotional, unprofessional, and influenced by their friendship with the applicant, another councillor. He says they did not understand their role and were willing to disregard planning law to try to force the application through.
2. Mr W says his subsequent code of conduct complaint to the Council was not dealt with in a timely manner, did not address the main points of his complaint, and he was caused distress, inconvenience, and annoyance by having to chase updates.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has directly 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 fault has not directly 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))

4. And we cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council, and watched the recording of the Planning Committee meeting.
6. I also considered the Council’s ‘Arrangements for dealing with allegations of breach of the Members’ code of conduct’, and our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. 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 the council considered the complaint, we will only investigate complaints if there is sufficient injustice to warrant our involvement or we consider it in the public interest to do so.
8. The Council’s solicitor, Monitoring Officer and Independent Person considered and discussed Mr W’s complaint. The Monitoring Officer concluded that although the debate at the Committee was somewhat emotional at times, the behaviour of the three councillors did not reach the threshold for further investigation, being largely matters of planning procedure. As such, the recommended informal resolution was for the councillors to attend a planning training session. This process of assessment is in accordance with the Council’s arrangements for determining code of conduct complaints, and it was ultimately for the Monitoring Officer to decide what resolution to recommend, even if Mr W thinks this does not go far enough.
9. I acknowledge there was delay by the Council in reaching its decision, and Mr W was put to some time and trouble in seeking updates on the progress of his case. However, the Council has apologised, and I do not consider the injustice arising from this fault to be so significant as to warrant the Ombudsman pursuing the matter further.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr W’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault in the way the Council reached its decision, and he has not been caused a significant injustice as a result of the associated delay.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman