Issue - meetings

Report

Appendix A1 – Original complaints

Appendix A2 – Additional information

Appendix A3 – Responses of subject members

Appendix B – Initial assessment decision notice

Appendix C – Request for review

Appendix D – Review decision notice

Appendix E – LGO decision

Appendix F – Preaction protocol letter

Appendix G – LGO solicitor response

Appendix H – Correspondence between the Council and the LGO solicitor

Appendix I – Assessment Criteria

Preamble

The complaints had been submitted on 8 May 2018 and received an initial assessment by the Deputy Monitoring Officer on 21 June 2018. The complainant had requested a review of those decisions, and a Review Sub-Committee upheld the decision of the Deputy Monitoring Officer on 25 July 2018. The complainant then referred the matter to the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman. Following an investigation, the Ombudsman concluded that the council’s consideration of the complaints had been flawed, and instructed the council to issue the complainant with a formal written apology, and to ‘reinvestigate’(sic) the complaint.

A Review Sub-Committee with different membership to that of 25 July 2018 was therefore convened to carry out afresh a review of the decision notices of 21 June 2018, having regard to the Ombudsman’s comments and associated documentation.

Following election of a Chairman for the meeting, an opportunity for declarations, explanation of the meeting procedure and a resolution to exclude any press or public, a statement was received from the complainant.  The complainant then withdrew from the meeting.

The Chairman led the Sub-Committee through the local assessment criteria which detailed the initial tests that should be satisfied before assessment of a complaint was commenced.

Upon going through the initial tests, it was agreed that the complaint related to the conduct of a member of a relevant council, that the member was a member at the time of the incident and remains a member of the relevant council. It was noted that a Code of Conduct was in place and had been provided with the complaint.

The Sub-Committee then had to decide whether the alleged behaviour would, if proven, amount to a breach of that Code of Conduct. Further, if it was felt it would be a breach, was it still appropriate under the assessment criteria to refer the matter for investigation.

Evidence

In reaching its decision, the Sub-Committee took into account the papers in the agenda, as follows:

·       The covering report;

·       The complaint and supporting documentation;

·       The response of the Subject Member;

·       The initial assessment decision notice of the Deputy Monitoring Officer to take no further action

·       The Complainant’s request for a review;

·       The decision notice of the Review Sub-Committee held on 25 July 2018;

·       The decision of Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman that the Council’s consideration of the complaint had been flawed;

·       A pre-action protocol letter from the Council to the Ombudsman;

·       The response of the solicitor for the Ombudsman;

·       Additional correspondence between the Council and the solicitor for the Ombudsman; and,

·       The local assessment criteria itself.

Additionally, the complainant had provided by email additional representations in response to the Monitoring Officer’s new report. The procedure rules for reviews of initial assessment decisions state under paragraph 5.3 that no new documentation should be introduced without agreement of the sub-committee.  However, the Sub-Committee decided to accept this representation under paragraph 5.4 of the procedure, to take account of written representations made since the publication of the agenda, as it was considered this  ...  view the full minutes text for item 41