Summary: We will not investigate this historical complaint about
Ms X’s experiences of the care system between the 1970s and 2000. We could not carry out a meaningful investigation due to the time that has passed, nor could we provide the information and closure Ms X seeks. It is open to Ms X to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office about how the Council responded to her information request.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained about her and her siblings’ placement into care, where she says she was abused, and the circumstances surrounding this. She says the Council later took her own children into care, where they were also abused. These events all occurred between the 1970s and 2000.
2. Ms X says the Council has failed to provide her access to the records she has requested about the above events. She says the matter has caused her significant trauma. She wants to be listened to, and to gain closure and understanding about what happened.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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 we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
6. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

9. When we receive a historical complaint, we must consider whether there is good reason for the delay in the person complaining, and whether we could investigate the matter in a meaningful way, given the time that has passed.
10. Ms X’s complaint relates to events between the 1970s and 2000. Ms X was a child at the beginning of this period. By the end, she was an adult with her own adult children. While we must account for the time it can take for a person who has suffered trauma to process and talk about the matter, decades have passed since Ms X became an adult who could reasonably have complained about some matters.
11. I have considered Ms X’s explanation that she could not make part of her complaint sooner due to fear of her perpetrator. She raised this issue with the Council three years ago, and she could also have escalated this matter to us at that time.
12. However, even had Ms X complained to us three years ago, it is very unlikely we would have been able to investigate the complaint. The more time that passes since events, the less able we are to carry out a fair and meaningful investigation. We could not answer many of the questions Ms X has about what happened to her as a child and young adult. We could not explain the circumstances around her and her siblings being taken into care, and the police are rightly involved as the organisation who could possibly provide insight into what happened. We cannot provide the answers and closure Ms X seeks, so we cannot provide a meaningful outcome by investigating the matter.
13. Part of Ms X’s complaint is about the Council’s more recent response to her requests for information. As this involves information about Ms X and other family members, this would be considered both a Subject Access Request and a Freedom of Information Request. The Information Commissioner’s Office is the organisation best placed to consider complaints about how organisations handle people’s data and respond to requests for information. In the absence of a wider complaint within our remit, there is not a good reason for us to consider the matter instead.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s historical complaint because we could not carry out a meaningful investigation, given the time that has passed since events.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman