Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the conduct of two Council officers. It is unlikely we could achieve a significantly different outcome than the apology and action already offered.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the conduct of two Council officers.

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 or continue an investigation if we decide:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation; or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. Mr X says he telephoned the Council about home recycling collections. He did not like the way the officer conducted the call including its termination. He says a manager promised to call him back later that day and did not do so. He complained to the Council.
6. The Council in reply apologised for his experience. It said it would address the situation internally to ensure it does not happen again. Mr X is not happy with the Council’s reply. He says he wants compensation.
7. The Council’s reply to Mr X represents a reasonable and proportionate outcome for the problems he reports. It is unlikely our investigation would achieve a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to achieve a significantly different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman