Summary: Miss X complained about the Council’s alleged breach of data protection legislation and how it dealt with her complaint. Miss X said the matter caused her anxiety and distress. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is a better placed body to deal with the substantive matter of this complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about the Council’s alleged breach of data protection. She said the Council disclosed her identity to the family of a child she had raised welfare concerns about. Miss X also complained about how the Council dealt with her complaint to it.
2. Miss X said the Council’s failings caused her anxiety, distress, lack of trust in councils and it led to a relationship breakdown between her and the child’s family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. 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

5. I discussed the complaint with Miss X. I considered the information Miss X and the Council provided.
6. I sent Miss X and the Council a copy of my draft decision and invited comments before reaching a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Miss X’s complaint is about ‘the Council’, referred to below as ‘Council 2’.
8. Miss X raised concerns about a child’s welfare to Council 1. Miss X said Council 1 told her it would pass the information she provided to Council 2 and the police for further investigation into the matter. This was because the child lived in Council 2’s area. Miss X said Council 1 confirmed her details would be kept confidential.
9. Miss X said she was later confronted by a member of the child’s family who got to know she had raised concerns about the child’s welfare to the Council.
10. Miss X made a formal complaint to Council 2 for disclosing her identity and the information she provided to the child’s family. She said she raised her concerns about the child’s welfare with the knowledge and expectation that her identity and the information she provided would be kept confidential. Miss X said as a result of Council 2’s breach of data protection, a member of the child’s family confronted her which caused her anxiety and distress.
11. After several months with no response from Council 2 to Miss X’s complaint, she contacted the Ombudsman. She complained about Council 2’s alleged breach of data protection legislation and its failure to deal and respond to the complaint she made to it.
12. Council 2 issued its response to Miss X’s complaint after she contacted the Ombudsman. Council 2 said it was its understanding that the information Miss X provided about the child’s welfare appeared to have been shared orally with the child’s family. It said there was no evidence it shared the information in a written form to the child’s family, therefore it did not constitute a data breach in line with case law. Miss X remained dissatisfied with Council 2’s response.

Analysis

13. The crux of Miss X’s complaint is about Council 2’s alleged breach of data protection legislation.
14. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is an independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with the complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation. This includes wrongly disclosing personal information.
15. Where someone has a complaint about data protection, the Ombudsman usually expects them to take the matter to the ICO. In this case, the Ombudsman considers it reasonable to expect Miss X to pursue her complaint with the ICO because it is better placed to deal with data protection matters. It has much wider powers to deal with such complaints and can decide if councils have failed in its duties as a data controller. The law also provides for a person to claim damages through the courts if the ICO upholds their complaint.
16. I note Miss X also complained about how Council 2 dealt with her complaint. However, the Ombudsman will not investigate any complaint handling issues when we are not going to investigate the substantive matter of a complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

17. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. This is because the matter she complained about is better placed with the Information Commisioner’s Office.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman