Making a complaint about a councillor

The Monitoring Officer will prepare a short summary of the complaint for the Assessment Sub-Committee, setting out the following details:

• Whether the complaint is within the Sub-Committee's jurisdiction
• The relevant paragraphs of the Code of Conduct
• A summary of the key aspects of the complaint
• Any further factual information (easily obtainable short of an investigation) which may assist the Sub-Committee with its decision. For example, this might include a copy of the member's entry in the register of interests.

The Monitoring Officer may also contact you, if necessary for clarification of any aspects of your complaint.

An "Assessment Sub-Committee" will then meet to consider your complaint and decide whether it should be referred for investigation or other action. This Sub-Committee is made up of an three members of the Standards Committee and must be chaired by an independent member (i.e. not a District, Town or Parish Councillor). The Sub-Committee will meet within an average of 20 working days of the date we receive your complaint. Meetings of the Assessment Sub Committee are 'closed', which means that neither you nor the complained of Member (if they happen to become aware of the meeting) will be able to attend.
 
The Assessment Sub-Committee will then need to decide what action is appropriate and in doing so the over-riding objective is to ensure fairness to both the complainant and the member being complained about. With this in mind the following criteria will be applied when initially assessing complaints:

• Has the complainant submitted enough information to satisfy the Sub-Committee that the complaint should be referred for investigation or other action?
• Is the complaint about someone who is no longer a member of the authority, but a member of another authority? If so, the Sub-Committee will consider referring the complaint to the Monitoring Officer of that other authority.
• Has the complaint already been the subject of an investigation or other action relating to the Code of Conduct. Alternatively, has the complaint been the subject of an investigation by other regulatory authorities? If so the Sub-Committee is likely to be inclined to conclude that there is nothing more to be gained by further action being taken
• Is the complaint about something that happened so long ago that there would be little benefit in taking action now?
• Is the complaint too trivial/not sufficiently serious to warrant further action? The Sub-Committee will consider whether the complaint is serious enough, if proven, to justify the range of sanctions available to itself (see below) or the Adjudication Panel for England. 
• Does the complaint appear to be simply malicious, politically motivated or "tit-for-tat"? If so the Sub-Committee is likely to conclude that further action is not warranted
• Is the alleged conduct part of a continuing pattern of less serious misconduct that is unreasonably disrupting the business of the authority and there are no other avenues left to deal with it, short of investigation?
• Does the complaint concern acts carried out in the member's private life, when they ere not carrying out the work of the authority and they can not be said to have misused their position as a member?
• Is the complaint really about dissatisfaction with a council decision rather than the member's conduct?

It is important to note that the purpose of Assessment Sub-Committee is simply to decide whether any action should be taken on the complaint - it makes no findings of fact. The process will take place in a private closed meeting to which the public will not be permitted. It must decide on which of the following steps to take with regard to the complaint:

• Refer the complaint to the Monitoring Officer for investigation or "other action". Other action is a deliberately broad term that may include options such as requiring the person you have complained about to apologise or undergo training or mediation. The Assessment Sub committee will carefully consider the circumstances surrounding your complaint when deciding whether other action is appropriate. If it decides to refer your complaint for other action we will explain what this involves.
• Refer the complaint to the Standards Board for England. This might occur where, for example, the complainant or complained of member is a member of the authority's Cabinet or standards committee, which would make it difficult for a local investigation to take place. Alternatively the case may be too serious or complex to be handle locally
• Decide that no action should be taken. If this is the decision, the complainant will have a right to request a review of decision within 30 working days after they have received the initial assessment decision. The Review Sub-Committee will be made up of different members of the Standards Committee from those who took part in the initial assessment and will similarly be chaired by an independent member. It will apply the same criteria as used by the Assessment Sub-Committee (For more details, see below)

When the Assessment Sub-Committee has reached its decision we will notify you in writing whether your complaint has been referred for investigation or other action. At the same time we will also write to the member(s) you have complained about and the parish or town clerk (if applicable). We will send these letters within five working days of the Assessment Sub-Committee reaching its decision. The decision of the Assessment Sub-committee is made available for public inspection once the Member complained of has been given a summary of the complaint. This will include the main points considered and any conclusions (including reasons).

In very limited situations the Member may not be given this summary immediately. This would be the case where the Sub-Committee concludes that it would be against the public interest or would prejudice any future investigation to give the complained of Member the written summary at this point. This could happen if it is considered likely that the complained of member may intimidate you or any witnesses involved. It could also happen where early disclosure of the complaint might lead to evidence being destroyed. Any decision to withhold the summary must be kept under review.

If the Assessment Sub-Committee decides not to refer your complaint for investigation or other action it will give you the reasons for this decision. It will also explain any right that you may have to ask for the decision to be reviewed.

It is very important that you set your complaint out fully and clearly, and provide all the information at the outset. You should also provide any documents or other material that you wish the Assessment Sub-committee to consider, where possible. 

We recommend that you use our complaint form or provide a covering note summarising what you are complaining about, especially if your complaint includes a lot of supporting documentation. In the summary you should tell us exactly what each person you are complaining about said or did that has caused you to complain. If you are sending supporting documentation please cross-reference it against the summary of your complaint.

You should be as detailed as possible and substantiate your complaint where you can. Although you are not required to prove your complaint at this stage of proceedings, you do have to demonstrate that you have reasonable grounds for believing that the member(s) complained about has breached the Code of Conduct.

As a matter of fairness and natural justice, a Member should usually be told who has complained about them. However, there may be instances where you feel it is very important for your identity to be kept confidential and if that is the case you should make the request clear when completing the complaint form. Such requests will only be granted in exceptional circumstances and at the discretion of the Assessment Sub-Committee. In particular the following will be considered:

• Do you have reasonable grounds for believing that you will be at risk of physical or psychological harm if your identity is disclosed to the member you are complaining about?
• Are you an officer who works closely with the complained of member such that you are afraid of the consequences to your employment if your identity is disclosed?
• Does you suffer from a serious health condition such that there are verifiable medical risks associated with your identity being disclosed?
• Is it possible to investigate the complaint without making your identity known?

In certain cases, such as allegations of bullying, revealing your identity may be necessary for investigation of the complaint. In such circumstances you will usually be given the option of requesting a withdrawal of the complaint. However, if you do make such a request, at any stage in the process, the Assessment Sub-Committee will still need to decide whether to grant your request and in doing so will take the following considerations into account:

• Does the public interest in taking some action on the complaint outweigh the complainant's desire to withdraw it?
• Is the complaint such that action can be taken on it, for example an investigation, without the complainant's participation?
• Is there an identifiable underlying reason for the request to with draw the complaint? For example, is there information to suggest that the complainant may have been pressured by the subject member, or an associate of theirs, to withdraw the complaint?

Generally an anonymous complaint will only be referred for investigation or some other action if it includes documentary or photographic evidence indicating an exceptionally serious or significant matter

Where the Assessment Sub-Committee has resolved to take no action in respect of a matter (that is, not to refer the matter to the Standards Board for England for investigation, and not to refer the matter to the Monitoring Officer either for investigation or for other appropriate action), the complainant may request, within 30 days of being notified , that the Review Sub-Committee be convened to review the decision of the Assessment Sub-Committee. The Review Sub-Committee will be made up of three members of the Standards Committee who took no part in consideration of the complaint at the Assessment stage.

Such a review shall be conducted in two stages:

In cases where the further information/evidence is of such significance that it changes the nature of the original complaint, the Review Sub-Committee should consider carefully whether it would be more appropriate to pass this to the Assessment Sub-Committee to be handled as a new complaint.

If the Review Sub-Committee determines that the initial decision was unreasonable, or that new information now available to the Sub-Committee demonstrates that the original decision is no longer the correct decision, it shall take a new decision in relation to the matter in accordance with these approved criteria. It has the same decisions available to it as the Assessment Sub-Committee.

The Guidance of the Standards Board for England is that a Review should be carried out within 3 months, but it will be the aim of this Council that any Review, should normally be completed within 20 working days of a request being submitted. The Sub-Committee will endeavour to ensure that its decision notice is sent out within five working days of the decision being made.

If a complainant remains dissatisfied with the conclusions of the Review, then she or he shall be informed of his or her right to refer the matter to the Local Government Ombudsman.

Where an investigation concludes that the complained of member has breached the Code of Conduct, a Hearing Sub-Committee will meet to in accordance with guidance issued by the Standards Board. The Sub-Committee will have the following sanctions available to it:

Queries about the Complaint Form and/or the complaint process

If you have any queries about making a complaint you should contact the Moniroting Officer at North Shropshire District Council, Mr T Collard, on 01939 238459, or, in his absence, the Deputy Monitoring Officer, Mrs Jean Sanders on 01939 232771