Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to delete records/information which contains false accusations made against him. This is because we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. In addition, the ICO is better placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council refused to delete records/information which contains false accusations made against him. Mr X wants the Council to delete the records which refer to the defamatory statements and accusations.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(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 and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s brother lives in a care home. During a review meeting, Mr X made an audio recording of the meeting for his personal use. Mr X did not tell those attending he was recording.
6. The care home manager asked Mr X to delete the recording. The care home manager later sent Mr X a letter which again requested Mr X delete the recording. The letter also stated: “it is not acceptable for staff to be covertly recorded while performing their duties, sharing the recording, and it not being saved securely.”
7. Mr X considers the letter made false accusations about him as he never shared the recording with anyone and that the recording was saved securely as it was held in a secure folder and encrypted. Mr X wants the Council to delete all references in its records to these accusations.
8. In response to his complaint, the Council confirmed it had added a note to its complaints record to clarify that the Council was not saying Mr X had shared the recording, but that it was highlighting the risk of that possibility along with the possibility of the recording was not being securely stored.
9. An investigation is not justified as we could not achieve the outcome Mr X wants. The Ombudsman cannot recommend the Council delete records or information. We would instead recommend the Council add information to the records to detail the individual’s disagreement with the information and their comments. As the Council has already done this, we would not recommend anything further.
10. If Mr X considers the Council should delete the records/information which refer to the claims about him sharing the recording and not saving it securely, then the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) would be better placed to consider the matter. This is because Mr X is essentially asking the Council to delete data related to him. The ICO can consider whether the Council’s refusal is in line with data protection legislation.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we cannot achieve the outcome he wants. In addition, the ICO is better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman