Decision report 201102951

Summary
Mr C complained about the council's trading standards department. He said that they had told him to obtain a specialist report on a newly installed door that he said was faulty and that this would be forwarded to the company concerned. Mr C later complained that the council reneged on their agreement to send the report. He said that as a result, it took longer to resolve matters and that he was not reimbursed the cost of the report. He also complained about the council's complaints handling, saying that the acting chief executive failed to respond properly to his concerns and left out important details.

Our investigation confirmed that the council officer had not send the report as he indicated he would. This was because he found out that the company had offered to send a representative from the manufacturers to inspect the door. He found this out at the same time he received the report from Mr C and took the view that it would be more appropriate to follow the manufacturer route. While this was a decision for him to take, we took the view that he should have told Mr C about it.

We found that the advice given to Mr C by trading standards staff was sound at the time it was given and that despite his claim that he was told to postpone submitting a claim for the cost of the report, there was no evidence to suggest this.

Although Mr C was unhappy with the acting chief executive's response, we found that he had replied in detail and had addressed Mr C's concerns. While Mr C did not agree with the terms of the response that does not mean that it was inappropriate.