Your correspondent John Merrett notes Wiltshire Council’s use of the strategy of defending itself (letters, September 4). I had the misfortune to suffer from the minutes of a committee being a false record of the motion that was passed, but the committee (for reasons that I understand but do not agree with) approved the minutes. The matter was trivial when compared with the problems of child abuse in Rotherham, but the desire to avoid the council being seen to be at fault was the same.

Wiltshire Council carried out three investigations into the matter, but not one of the investigating officers considered it necessary to ask the proposer of the motion what motion he had proposed, nor to consider evidence from those present as to what motion was put to the committee. In other words, all three investigations were a farce.

The council pointed out to me that I could take the matter up with the Local Government Ombuds-man. I did so, not realising at the time that the LGO finds fault with councils in less than one per cent of all cases referred to it. Her decision was that she was not going to investigate my case, as ‘she was unlikely to find fault with the council’. She said that she was aware that I had said that I had witnesses. Since the witness statements had already been sent, it is clear from her statement that she had not read them.

The LGO reports to the Select Committee of the Department of Communities and Local Government. I wrote to the chairman and members, and received a reply that the committee does not investigate individual cases. So no-one will ever investigate a decision made by the LGO.

My local MP was made aware of the matter, but considered it to be a matter for the council.

With this level of protection, the council can act as it wishes, in this case violating its own constitution.

Colin Labouchere, Kington St Michael.