Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the information the Council holds on the complainant. The right to access personal data which the Council holds about the complainant under the UK General Data Protection Regulation is a more suitable route to access the information he wants to know. If the complainant remains unhappy the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr D says the Council has failed to adequately answer his questions. Mr D feels he cannot get closure following the death of a family member, without clarity from the Council.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any fault has not caused significant enough injustice to the person who complained to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr D contacted the Council after his relative died. Mr D wants to know if the Council held his contact details and is not satisfied with the answers the Council has given, which he has found contradictory.
6. The Council says the client affairs team, who Mr D was in contact with, did not hold his contact details and did not know about him until he made contact.
7. Other departments may hold information about Mr D which was not shared with the client affairs team. And this is why Mr D finds the information contradictory. The Council has told Mr D he can make a subject access request to find out any information the Council holds on him. This is the correct route to answer the questions about what information the Council had. If Mr D is not satisfied with the response to a subject access request, the Information Commissioner’s Office is then better placed to consider the issues about personal data.

Back to top

Final decision

8. While we can understand Mr D’s frustrations and wishes for clarity, it is not the Ombudsman’s role to investigate solely to get answers for someone; that would not be a good use of our limited resource. We will not investigate Mr D’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault or significant injustice to justify an investigation. The Council has tried to answer Mr D’s queries, but he remains unhappy. The right to access personal data which the Council holds about Mr D under the UK General Data Protection Regulation is a more suitable route to access the information Mr D wants to know. If he remains unhappy the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman