A complaint about Romford MP Andrew Rosindell has been thrown out by the parliamentary standards commissioner, he has said.

The Conservative politician was reported by neighbouring Labour MP Jon Cruddas last month for allegedly using taxpayers’ money to fund an election campaign.

Mr Cruddas’s office said they telephoned the number on a leaflet for Conservative candidate Sam Holland in Dagenham and Rainham, and the person who answered said, “Andrew Rosindell’s office”.

Mr Rosindell told the Recorder that the Conservative association office was in the same building as his own and both had portable phones, so a member of his staff may simply have answered the wrong phone.

Mr Holland said he had no reason to doubt Mr Rosindell’s explanation.

Mr Rosindell said he had now received an email from the standards commissioner, saying that the case has been closed.

It said: “This allegation was reviewed and the commissioner decided that opening a formal inquiry would not be justified.”

Mr Cruddas’s office did not respond to requests for comment on this decision.

Mr Rosindell called the complaint a "politically motivated accusation" by Mr Cruddas which "caused much distress to my staff who answer my calls to the constituency office".

“I have always had a good working relationship with Jon as my neighbouring colleague, so I was surprised by what seemed to be a thoroughly spiteful attack on me and my team, based on false information," he added.

In his initial complaint, Mr Cruddas had suggested that the telephone line given on Mr Holland’s leaflet was taxpayer-funded.

He later accepted that that appeared not to be the case, but said it still appeared that Mr Rosindell’s taxpayer-funded staff had been answering calls.

“He really should apologise for getting things so wrong,” said Mr Rosindell.

“My professional and hard-working staff were unfairly put under immense stress and pressure over these untrue accusations. Jon Cruddas now owes them a full apology for his actions.”

We asked the standards commissioner’s office whether Mr Cruddas’s complaint had been thrown out because it had been positively disproved, or because there was insufficient evidence.

It did not answer.