Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement in his mother’s care and welfare from late 2016 to early 2017. The complaint lies outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because it is late. I see no good reason to exercise discretion to consider this late complaint now. If Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s final response it remains open to him to complain to the Information Commissioner as signposted by the Council.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I call Mr X, complains about the Council’s involvement in his mother’s care from September 2016 to February 2017. Mr X says the Council has failed to answer his recent questions about its actions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We can decide whether to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered the information Mr X provided in his complaint. I also considered the Council’s complaint responses which I requested from the Council. I sent Mr X a draft of my decision and considered his comments in response.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr X complains about the Council’s involvement in his mother’s care and welfare, and with him, from September 2016 until February 2017, when his mother died. Mr X says the Council has refused to answer his questions about this.
8. Mr X first complained to the Council about these events in 2017 and received several responses from the Council. Mr X was unhappy the Council withheld or redacted some third-party data in the responses it provided in 2017.
9. In May 2019, Mr X asked the Council to respond to his further questions about its involvement with his mother’s care.
10. The Council responded, explaining it had already provided as much information on the matters raised as it was able to in its previous responses. It said it was not permitted to share any further records it holds on the matter with him. It signposted Mr X to the Information Commissioner if he was dissatisfied with its response to his information request.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate this complaint. The complaint lies outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction because it is late. The law says complaints should be made to the Ombudsman within 12 months of the person first becoming aware of the matter. Mr X has clearly been aware of these events since at least 2017, when he first complained. I see no good reason to exercise discretion to consider this late complaint now.
12. As Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s response to his request for more information, it is reasonable to expect him to ask the Information Commissioner to consider it, as per the Council’s signposting in its final response. The Information Commissioner is the appropriate body to consider freedom of information matters.
13. Mr X says the Council was engaged in criminal activity in relation to the events complained about in 2016. We cannot investigate allegations of criminal behaviour. Crime is a matter for the police to consider and investigate, and possibly the courts to decide. We could not investigate such allegations even if the complaint was made in time.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman