Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about mistreatment by staff at a Council-run hostel. We could not add to the Council’s investigation and it is unlikely we would achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about unfair treatment by staff whilst staying at a Council-run hostel. He says this has caused him distress.

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
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(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 the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In its complaint responses, the Council explained how it had investigated his concerns. It said hostel staff had a duty to act following reports from another resident. It accepted Mr X had not intended to cause other residents to feel harassed or distressed. It found no evidence of discrimination.
6. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council has appropriately investigated his concerns and explained why hostel staff acted as they did. It has accepted Mr X did not intend to cause any distress. It is unlikely an investigation by us could add to the Council’s response or would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation or would reach to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman