Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council refusing to remove records from his daughter Y’s social care file, which he says are false. The Ombudsman cannot order the Council to remove the information, which is the outcome Mr X seeks. The Information Commissioner’s Officer is the body best placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

1. Mr X is the carer of his daughter Y who has learning disabilities, deafness, autism and mental health conditions. Y lives with her parents, Mr and Mrs X.
2. Mr X says there is a record, held by the Council on Y’s social care file, detailing false allegations by a third party that Mrs X assaulted Y. Mr X complains the Council has refused to delete this record from Y’s file.
3. Mr X says the record causes distress and inconvenience as the matter keeps coming up, so Y and her family must repeatedly explain the allegations are untrue. Mr X wants the Council to agree to remove the record.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• 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)

5. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if they have a complaint about data issues. 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

6. As part of my assessment I have:
• considered the complaint and the documents provided by Mr X;
• issued a draft decision, inviting Mr X to reply.

Back to top

What I found

7. I understand the Council received the information which Mr X disputes from a third party, investigated, and took no further action. I do not consider the Ombudsman should investigate this complaint. Councils are required to keep full records of information received regarding social care clients. The Ombudsman cannot order a council to delete information which forms part of the client’s history, even where an allegation is disputed. So the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants.
8. Mr X may wish to submit a document to the Council, expressing his disagreement with the record of the alleged assaults, and asking it to keep this on Y’s file. Mr X’s disagreement may already have been filed, as a result of his complaint to the Council.
9. Mr X may also wish to refer his complaint to the ICO. The ICO can require organisations within its jurisdiction to take action in response to complaints. I do not consider there are good grounds for the Ombudsman to investigate the complaint, in place of the ICO, for the reason given above. Furthermore, the ICO is the body created by national government to consider issues regarding people’s data, so is the organisation best placed to consider Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because:
• the Ombudsman cannot achieve the outcome Mr X wants;
• the ICO is the organisation best placed to consider Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman