When a Council treats your poorly, just remember, they must be FAIR and unbiased in their decision-making process.
Council Watch gets thousands of complaints a year. In some cases, people just do not like the decision made against them, however, in many cases we do find that Councils do not always act in a FAIR manner. This is very important.
In 2014, the Victorian Ombudsman identified:
"that one of the main causes of complaints against local councils was the way those councils dealt with complaints. All too often complaints were seen as a nuisance, or provoked a defensive, bureaucratic or unhelpful response". Vic Ombudsman
We often need to review procedures, processes, and look at how Councils have TREATED the person involved in the complaint and it is in the treatment that we often can expose flaws and faults in Council decisions.
It would not surprise you I am sure, that Councils have a pretty poor record in handling complaints. They are bad at reporting, tracking, and resolving complaints.
Councils also cannot define what a complaint is - they literally spend more time arguing over what constitutes a complaint, than solving one.
We know that between 2015 & 2019, the Victorian Ombudsman's office said just that and issued extensive reports into just how bad Council really are at handling complaints.
The reports (links below) show just how poor Councils really are. We know it is the same in all Australian states.
We also know that many Councils go so far as to BAN people from being able to contact staff in circumstances where the CEO or Executives "FEEL" the persons language or words in emails and correspondence has been "offensive". Often these bans and processes are excessive, could deny your human rights and cause you the inability to access what are public services.
What’s worse is we hear all the time that Councillors are told “it is an operational matter, you cannot get involved”. WHAT UTTER BOLLOCKS.
Yes, the Local Government Acts across Australia prevent “meddling” in matters under the administrative jurisdiction of Council officers, but they do not prevent Councillors setting the standards of behaviour, response, reporting, and resolution of complaints.
Councillors can and should set the top-down mandates on HOW an organisation behaves. That is their fundamental role in balancing the administrative bureaucratic egos against the wishes of their communities that elected them.
In 2015, a determined woman living in KNOX Council in Melbourne did the unthinkable. She took her Council to the High Court over them attempting to destroy her dog. The High Court found that the process the Council followed in the decision-making, could give rise to a fair and reasonable person concluding that officers had apprehended bias.
Apprehended Bias
If there could be a reasonable apprehension that a council officer has an interest in the decision which could affect his or her proper decision making (including an interest arising out of a prior role) then that will be sufficient to invalidate the decision on the basis of a denial of procedural fairness
The High Court unanimously allowed the appeal and quashed the orders made by the previous courts. The Court found that a fair-minded observer might reasonably believe that the Council Officer's role in the Magistrates Court proceedings gave the Council Officer an interest that was incompatible with her involvement in the decision-making process of the Committee.
It ruled that “apprehended bias” could be assumed by a fair and reasonable person.
Consequences for council decision making
In light of this decision, councils should consider the decision-making roles of council officers to ensure, wherever possible, that different officers are involved in distinct decision making which could result from the same circumstances. For example, consideration should be given as to whether or not a council officer responsible for deciding to prosecute a restaurant owner for breach of food safety standards should be involved in any further decisions resulting from the restaurant's breach of health standards (e.g. decisions to revoke council issued permits). Council officers should also consider their role in other decisions relating to the same circumstances before participating in a subsequent decision-making process. The High Court's decision emphasises that apprehended bias can arise from a conflict of interest resulting from a council officer's prior role without a suggestion that the council officer has prejudged the matter. – Wallmans Lawyers.
What is procedural fairness?
Procedural fairness is a central concept in administrative law. It means fairness in the procedures followed when arriving at an administrative decision. Procedural fairness is fundamental to the administration of justice. When procedural fairness has not been given, a person can file an appeal and get a decision overturned on that basis.
When there has been a denial of procedural fairness, the decision that is made is invalid regardless of whether or not the decision itself was the correct or preferable decision.
What does this mean for you?
If you have a situation where you believe a Council officer or decision of Council has denied you procedural fairness and there is an argument that officers acted with apprehended bias, please contact Council Watch to see if we can help.
Any issues, questions or requests for help should be directed to info@councilwatch.com.au
Council Watch does not give legal advice, this information is general in nature only and does not consider your personal circumstances. Council Watch makes no warranty, promise or guarantee that it will overturn a decision of Council against you, BUT we will help you where we can.
Reference materials:
it's Tiffy again as you know I am totally blind and hearing-impaired, and in terms of fairness how the hell can the City of Whittlesea Council tell me that now I've paid my rates it's not their problem if I don't have any food! I've only got a couple of days worth of food left that I've cooked last week, and I get told it's not their problem! I'm gonna collapse soon literally if I don't get any assistance!
my name is Tiffy I'm totally blind hearing-impaired I live in South Morang and it's not just when the council isn't fair, but they're actually breaching their duty of care by not having an emergency number where residents of the municipality of Whittlesea May want to get in touch with council staff either after hours or on weekends when the bin is supposed to be emptied but isn't, however that person is injured because the bin wasn't emptied and that person has a disability! That person was me on Saturday, 4 January 2025 when at 11:10 am or about that time I went out to my gate and checked each bin to make sure that they were empty because …
Very true. Despite not being afforded procedural fairness, Kingston Council can destroy a tiny business and remove an essential & longstanding community resource operated out of a community hall. There is seemingly no recourse & they do what they please. Truly appalling.
Casey council has allowed staff to be abusive. , threatening , intimidating rate payers . There is compassion or rational decision making. Officers have focused on money grabbing and harassment . I’m not sure the new council will be able to change this . Bureaucratic processes seems to be dominate , rather than good judgment .
Wow I thought you were commenting on what’s happening right now in Kingston City Council.
Evicting a long term resident out of one of their halls…it’s disgraceful behaviour by a council. Their timing, done whilst Councillors were in “caretaker mode”! I’m sure you will hear about it!
It really has gone “to the dogs” 🐕