Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint about the Council’s safeguarding investigation into her concerns about her daughter, Ms C, being bullied. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an Ombudsman investigation. It would be reasonable for Mrs B to ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider her complaint about the Council sharing data she believes it should not have shared.

The complaint

1. Mrs B complained about the Council’s failure to properly investigate concerns that her daughter, Ms C is being bullied by other students and has failed to protect her. In addition, Mrs B says the Council should not have shared the Independent Investigators report with Ms C’s college because it is a breach of her personal data. Mrs B says the Council should ask the college to return the report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Council said Mrs B’s complaints about Ms C being bullied did not meet the threshold for a section 42 safeguarding investigation but investigated the concerns raised. Further investigation by the Ombudsman could not add to the findings. The Council acknowledged Ms C has experienced hurtful and upsetting comments from her peers, and that these have had an impact on Ms C. Although it did not uphold Mrs B’s complaints, it explained there is a robust and detailed plan in place to support Ms C in her education and her developmental skills. The Council says Ms C would benefit from someone sitting with her and listening to her when she is saying she is frightened and would also benefit from spending time accessing other community-based provision outside of her college to build her confidence and resistance, but Ms C has refused to engage, The Council says this option is still open to Ms C if she wants it. We could not say this is fault.
7. Mrs B says the Council should not have provided Ms C’s college a copy of the Independent Investigator’s report and contacted the ICO. The ICO will decide whether the Council should have shared the report and if not whether any sanctions such as returning the report should be implemented.

Back to top

Final decision

8. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault with the actions taken by the Council to warrant an Ombudsman investigation. It would be reasonable for Mrs B to ask the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider her concerns about the Council sharing data she believes it should not have shared.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman