Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with the complainant’s concerns about the conduct of a councillor. This is because we are unlikely to find fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X has complained about how the Council’s Monitoring Officer dealt with his complaint about the conduct of a councillor. Mr X says the Monitoring Officer’s decision was wrong and he has been caused significant upset by the matter.

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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and 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. Each council has different rules for dealing with complaints about code of conduct breaches.
6. The Ombudsman does not provide an appeal against the Monitoring Officer’s decisions. We are also unable to investigate or comment on the actions of the councillor complained about. Where a decision has been made in line with the correct procedure, taking account of the relevant evidence, the Ombudsman will generally not criticise the decision, even if the complainant does not agree with it.
7. I am satisfied the Monitoring Officer properly considered Mr X’s concerns before deciding his complaint should not be investigated. The Monitoring Officer considered the issues raised by Mr X and the response from the councillor complained about. However, the Monitoring Officer decided the code of conduct had not been breached.
8. The Monitoring Officer was entitled to use their professional judgement to decide further action should not be taken. The Monitoring Officer also consulted the Independent Person and explained why they did not consider the complaint should be investigated. As the Monitoring Officer properly considered Mr X’s concerns, in line with the Council’s arrangements for dealing with complaints about the conduct of councillors, it is unlikely I would find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we are unlikely to find fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman