Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions after it received a complaint about Miss X from a market trader. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained after the Council suspended her from its market facility, following a complaint by a trader. Miss X said the Council was responsible for systemic discrimination and this has caused her difficulties in trading.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. 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)
3. 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X said the Council treated her unfairly and discriminated against her by undertaking disciplinary action against her as a market trader. She also said she had been discriminated against because it had not provided a language translator during a disciplinary hearing about the same matter.
7. The Council has a policy that’s says where it receives a complaint about a trader and identifies this to be a serious breach of its standards for market stall holders, it can suspend a trader’s involvement in its markets, while it investigates.
8. According to the information I have seen, in July 2024, the Council received a complaint, and it investigated. It then wrote to Miss X after its investigation and re-instated her ability to trade at its market facility. Given the information I have seen, it is unlikely we would find fault in the Council’s decision making here.
9. Miss X said the Council discriminated against her by not providing a language translator for her disciplinary hearing. The Council said it had not previously received any request from Miss X for translation services previously, and therefore did not arrange one. It said had it received such a request it would have planned for a translator. Noting the Council’s reply here, it is unlikely we would find fault in its decision not to arrange a language translator.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is unlikely we would find fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman