Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about a claim for discretionary council tax relief and the Council’s requirement that the complainant must provide his date of birth. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because there is another body (the Information Commissioner) better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council delayed assessing his claim for discretionary council tax relief. He also complains that the Council requires him to provide his date of birth (DOB) when he calls to discuss the claim.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 read the complaint and the Council’s responses. I considered comments Mr X made in reply to a draft of this complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. In April Mr X asked for a form to claim discretionary council tax relief. He then complained about not having received the form. He also complained that when he calls the Council he is asked to provide his DOB. Mr X says he will not provide his DOB so he cannot discuss his claim.
6. In response the Council explained that the records indicated a claim form was posted on 8 April. It sent another form with the complaint reply and said Mr X could download a form from the website. The Council agreed an officer Mr X spoke to could have been more helpful. It apologised for the poor customer service. The Council assessed the claim on 24 May and notified Mr X of the outcome. It awarded discretionary council tax relief of £59. This reduced the amount of council tax Mr X has to pay during 2019/20.
7. The Council explained that it asks for the DOB as part of the identity and verification process in order to protect personal data. It pointed out that it already holds Mr X’s DOB so he is just being asked to confirm data the Council already holds. It said that he can make email enquires without giving a DOB and can make general enquires without a DOB. It declined Mr X’s suggestion that people should choose from one of three possible DOBs. It said that system would not be secure because there would be a one in three chance of making a successful guess. It also said it was not necessary to change the telephone message to tell people they would be asked to provide their DOB. It said the DOB is held securely in its systems.
8. Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s reply. He wants the Council to change its procedures regarding asking for a DOB. He says the Council asks for his DOB if he is just making general enquiries. He says he has been red flagged so the Council asks for his DOB every time he gets in touch.

Assessment

9. I will not start an investigation for the following reasons.
10. Mr X says the Council delayed processing his claim for council tax relief. Mr X asked for a form in early April and was told his claim had been successful on 24 May. This was not an undue delay and does not represent fault by the Council which requires an investigation.
11. The Council has explained why it asks people to provide their DOB and has pointed out that Mr X is merely being asked to provide information that the Council already has. If Mr X is dissatisfied with the Council’s explanation, and thinks the Council’s approach poses a risk to his personal data, he can contact the ICO. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to complain to the ICO because that is the appropriate body to consider complaints about how organisations handle personal data.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I will not start an investigation because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because Mr X can contact the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman