Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about standards committees because we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs Y complained the Council has failed to promptly investigate her complaint about a local councillor and only concluded after several years.
2. Mrs Y says the issue has caused significant distress and she has had to spent considerable amounts of time over the issues for several years. She says she feels the Council failed to deal with the problems fairly because of the councillor’s position.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
5. 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, 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

6. I considered information Mrs Y and the Council provided and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Following her complaint, Mrs Y has agreed to accept a payment of £2,270 for costs and a payment of £2,000 in recognition of the distress caused from the Council. This payment will reimburse costs Mrs Y incurred as a result of the out-of-pocket expenses. The Council has then considered the emotional impact on Mrs Y of the issues she experienced.
8. When someone has suffered an injustice, we try to put them back in the position they would have been had that error not occurred. Our focus is on restoring services that have been denied and taking practical steps to put things right. Where that takes the form of a payment, it is often a modest amount whose value is intended to be largely symbolic, rather than purely financial. It is not our role to assess economic losses or award compensation. We do not impose punitive fines for errors or take action to punish people.
9. The offer the Council has made, of £2,000 for emotional distress for the issues experienced, while it will not negate the upset caused, is proportionate and in accordance with our own guidance on remedies in recognising that the injustice impacted Mrs Y. We are therefore satisfied with the steps the Council has agreed to take to remedy Mrs Y’s injustice.
10. The Council has properly considered and investigated the complaint and its impact on Mrs Y, it is unlikely the Ombudsman would be able to add to the original investigation. Further, the Council has offered a proportionate and appropriate remedy for the injustice caused by its fault, having considered both the costs Mrs Y has paid and the emotional impact of the issue. Consequently, it is unlikely further consideration of this complaint would lead to a different outcome.
11. As we are not able to consider the substantive issue it is not a good use of public resources and funds to investigate how the Council dealt with the complaint about the councillor. It would not be in the public interest to conduct an investigation into this matter, particularly where a remedy which is sufficient has been provided.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mrs Y’s complaint because we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome and there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman