Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council’s children’s services dealt with a concern raised about Mr X’s child. Investigation would not achieve a worthwhile and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider data protection matters.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about how the Council’s children’s services dealt with a concern about his child. Mr X says inaccurate information has been recorded about him in the Council’s assessment, that communication with him has been poor and that his complaint has not been properly considered.

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, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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. The Council received a concern about the care of Mr X’s child. A strategy meeting was held which led to a visit to Mr X’s home by a social worker and the police. The Council wanted to carry out a child and family assessment, but says Mr X refused to consent to this. The case was subsequently closed.
7. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with the concern about Mr X’s child. The Council’s case is closed and it has no current involvement with Mr X’s family, so investigation is not going to be able to achieve any meaningful outcome..
8. If Mr X feels the Council is holding inaccurate information about him then he can request that it rectifies this under GDPR. If the Council refuses, then it would be reasonable for Mr X to progress the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who are better placed to consider complaints about data protection.
9. I appreciate that Mr X feels the Council did not correspond with him properly during its involvement with him and his family. However, this alone will not have caused a significant enough injustice to warrant investigation.
10. Finally, I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with his complaints about these matters. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because doing so would not achieve a worthwhile outcome and the ICO are better placed to consider many of the issues raised.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman