Privacy settings

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Southampton City Council (18 017 267)

Category : Children's care services > Child protection

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 26 Mar 2019

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council creating and holding inaccurate information. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to decide if the Council breached the Data Protection Act.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I shall call Miss X, says the Council carried out a poor assessment process which resulted in it holding inaccurate information about her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
  2. 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

  1. I considered the information Miss X provided with her complaint which included the Council’s reply to her complaint. I considered Miss X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Miss X has a grandchild to her son, whom the Council completed a child protection assessment on in the summer of 2018. Miss X says this assessment was poorly collated. She says the assessment’s author did not contact her or discuss the issue and events they put in the assessment about her, with her. She says as a result the assessment contains inaccurate information about her. She says she is misrepresented in the report. She says this caused great problems within her family relationships.
  2. Miss X complained to the Council. It upheld her complaint about poor communication and apologised. It told her that her complaint about the holding of inaccurate information was a Data Protection complaint and referred her to the correct procedure to use.


  1. Miss X alleges fault in the Council’s assessment process. She says this fault led to an inaccurate assessment.
  2. Parliament set up the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider allegations of Data Protection Act breaches. The holding of inaccurate information can be such a breach. Given this case involves complex child protection information, it is reasonable to expect Miss X to use the ICO. Miss X says she has complained to the ICO but there will be a delay to its investigation or decision.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the ICO is better placed.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page