Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council handled a blue badge renewal and X’s data. This is because we have decided any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, and the information commissioner’s office is better placed to consider the data complaint.

The complaint

1. X complains the Council renewed her blue badge for nine months despite being eligible for the maximum renewal of three years. They say this has caused them injustice because X could be fined in the future for not having a valid badge. X would like the Council to reconsider its decision, and how it decides blue badge eligibility.
2. X also complains about how the Council collected and used her data in the renewal application process, and about how it handled to her resulting complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. People may complain to us about injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’ by a public organisation we could investigate. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1) or section 34C(1)(a)).
4. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), section 34(B))
5. 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).

6. We will not normally investigate complaint handling if we are not investigating the rest of the complaint. This is because there is not usually enough injustice to justify us doing so. We collect information about particularly poor complaint handling practice and report this back to organisations. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), or section 34B(8)).

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. X applied to renew their blue badge. The Council agreed to renew the badge for nine months, based on the information it held. X challenged the decision and the Council agreed to reconsider the renewal expiration date if X provided supporting evidence.
10. The law means we can choose only to investigate a complaint where the person has suffered serious loss, harm, or distress as a direct result of faults or failures by the body complained about. We will not normally investigate a complaint where the alleged loss or injustice is not a serious or significant matter.
11. I recognise the circumstances of X’s complaint have affected them, but this is not significant enough to warrant us investigating.
12. X complained to the Council about the data it collected as part of the application process. X has taken the complaint to the Information Commissioner’s Office, who is better placed to consider it.
13. We will not investigate the way the Council handled the complaint and correspondence here because we are satisfied it did not cause enough separate injustice to warrant it.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate this complaint because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. The information commissioner’s office is better placed to consider the data complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman