Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to address his concerns about a Business Improvement District and did not let him address its Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The Council was not at fault for Mr X not attending the committee. It was at fault for not responding in writing to the concerns Mr X raised which it had agreed to do. It has agreed to do so now.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has failed to address his concerns about a Business Improvement District (BID) and did not let him address the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee about his concerns. He says this has caused him frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I have considered the information provided by Mr X and discussed the complaint with him on the telephone. I have considered initial information from the Council and the relevant law and guidance.
5. I gave Mr X and the Council the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision. I considered any comments I received in reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Business Improvement Districts (BID)

6. BIDs are business led partnerships created by councils or other people or organisations following a ballot of businesses. They deliver additional services (beyond those provided by councils) to local businesses over a defined time period. They operate in a defined area where an additional levy is charged to all non-domestic rate payers in addition to the non-domestic rates bill. BIDs are business led and business funded. The local council is responsible for managing the ballot and collecting the levy. The council can veto proposed BIDs where they decide they conflict with existing policies. Once the BID has been set up, it can be managed by a private company, or a partnership with the council. Most BIDs are not for profit companies.
7. Councils manage billing and collection of levies and hold the levy in a ring-fenced revenue account on behalf of the BID body. How money is spent is a matter for the BID.
8. In 2015, the Department for Communities and Local Government produced Guidance and Best Practice on Business Improvement Districts. This says there is no limit on what projects or services can be provided through a BID. The only requirement is that it should be something that is in addition to services provided by local authorities. Improvements may include but are not limited to extra safety/security, cleaning and environmental measures.
9. There are no regulations addressing how BID schemes should be managed or administered once established. BIDs have a free hand to constitute their managing board, make spending decisions and seek additional income as they see fit. BIDs are not public bodies and are therefore not subject to transparency and accountability requirements that apply to such bodies. Government technical guidance for councils on BIDs sets out their role in establishing the districts, satisfying themselves they offer additional services, collecting levies and ending a BID if it runs out of money or cannot deliver services.

Good Administrative Practice

10. The Ombudsman publishes Principles of Good Administrative Practice which we use as a benchmark for assessing the standards we expect when we investigate the actions of local authorities. These include that councils should explain clearly the rationale for decisions and giving reasons for decisions.

What happened

11. Mr X lives in an area where a BID operates. He says he represents a group of non-domestic rate payers who have concerns about how the BID is operated (who I refer to as ‘the group’).
12. In September 2022 Mr X and other representatives of the group met with two councillors to raise concerns about how the local BID operated. Mr X listed some specific concerns including a concern that the BID had donated some equipment to a company and was now paying that company for its services.
13. The minutes of the meeting record that “all the comments made at this meeting would be taken into account and [Mr X] would be provided with a written response in due course”.
14. In December 2022 the Council’s Overview and Scrutiny Committee were provided with an update on the work of the BID. It noted the report’s content.
15. Mr X contacted the Council in January 2023 with concerns that he was not invited to the Overview and Scrutiny Committee meeting and was not given sufficient notice of the meeting. He asked for another opportunity to address the Overview and Scrutiny Committee with the BID there to answer his questions. The Council wrote to Mr X in February 2023. It said it had notified him of the meeting by email; this was nine days before the date of the meeting. The agenda was also public and on the Council’s website. It said the Committee was comfortable that the BID was meeting the aims and objectives outlined in its business plan. It enclosed a copy of the business plan and committee minutes. It said if Mr X had any further specific queries he should put them in writing and it would discuss them with the Overview and Scrutiny Committee Chair as to whether they wished for officers to follow them up further.
16. Mr X complained to us that he was not able to address the committee and the Council had not considered his concerns about the BID. We asked the Council to respond to Mr X’s complaint and it wrote to him in March 2023.
17. The Council referred to the letter sent to Mr X in February 2023. It said he should raise any specific concerns about the BID with the Chief Executive and or police as appropriate. Without specific evidence no further action could be taken.
18. It advised it had sent Mr X details about the Overview and Scrutiny Committee using an email address it had for him as a representative of the group and it had corresponded using that address in August 2022. It asked for confirmation of Mr X’s email address to avoid any confusion going forward.
19. The Council has provided a copy of the email it sent to Mr X advising him that the BID would be attending the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The email included details of how members of the public could attend meetings and of the public participation guidelines.
20. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to us. He says at the meeting in September 2022 he gave the Council details of the correct email address to use for correspondence.

Findings

21. Mr X was unhappy he was not able to attend the Overview and Scrutiny Committee. The evidence shows the Council emailed Mr X to advise him of the date of the Committee meeting. Mr X says at the meeting in September 2022 he provided an alternative email address for the Council to use. I cannot know exactly what was said at that meeting but the minutes of it make no reference to Mr X providing an alternative email address and the Council used an email address it had on file for the group. In addition, the Council published the agenda for the meeting on its website. Mr X missed the opportunity to attend the meeting but I cannot say that was due to Council fault.
22. The Council’s role in overseeing the BID is limited. The Council has a statutory role in collecting the BID levy and in satisfying itself the BID proposal is acceptable but BIDs are business led and business funded. As the BID is a limited company it is for the BID to decide how to use the funding in line with its business plan.
23. As I have set out at paragraph 2 above, the Ombudsman will not investigate a complaint where there is another body better placed to consider it. Mr X raised a number of concerns at the meeting which are not matters which the Ombdusman should investigate:
• Issues around value for money and the cost effectiveness of the BID are matters best considered by the Council’s audit team.
• Concerns of fraud are police matters because they are allegations of crime.
• Complaints about the behaviour of individual councillors are matters for the Council’s Monitoring Officer and Standards Committee.
24. However, Mr X raised several specific concerns when he met with the Council in September 2022 and the minutes record the Council agreed to provide a written response to Mr X. I have seen no evidence it has done so, setting out how it considered the points he raised. This is fault and caused Mr X frustration.
25. In line with our principles of good administrative practice, we would expect a council to provide a clear explanation of how it has considered the specific issues Mr X has raised. The Council has not done so. The Council’s complaint response in March 2023, did not comment on the specific issues he raised or set out why the Council would or would not consider the issues further.

Back to top

Agreed action

26. Within one month the of the final decision the Council has agreed to write to Mr X setting out its response to the concerns Mr X raised at the meeting in September 2022.
27. The Council should provide us with evidence it has complied with the above actions.

Back to top

Final decision

28. I have completed my investigation. There was evidence of fault causing injustice which the Council has agreed to remedy.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman