Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of information related to her adopted children and its previous decision on her earlier complaint. Part of the complaint has already been considered and decided. The remaining matters concern data handling issues which are for the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider, or have not caused Mrs X a significant enough injustice

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains that the Council misled her and the Ombudsman in a previous investigation by wrongly stating that files relating to her adopted children had been lost in a fire. She says new evidence from a Subject Access Request shows that the files were not lost in that fire. Mrs X considers the misinformation affected the earlier Ombudsman decision and the remedy offered. She also raises concerns about the Council’s handling of her complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. 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.

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. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about lost records. This is because the Ombudsman previously investigated this matter, finding fault by the Council and recommended a payment to remedy the injustice caused by the loss of the documents, which Mrs X declined. We do not consider repeat complaints about the same matters.
7. The new evidence that Mrs X refers to relates primarily to data management and information handling. These matters fall within the remit of the Information Commissioner’s Office who are better placed to consider such matters.
8. Mrs X’s concerns about the complaint handling and correspondence with the Council do not, by themselves, amount to a significant enough injustice that would warrant a further investigation.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because part of the complaint has already been decided. The remaining matters are for the Information Commissioners Office to consider or have not caused Mrs X a significant enough injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman