Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council sharing information with a family member without his permission. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint whilst the case is subject to ongoing court proceedings. Also, the substantive complaint is about a data matter which is best considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complains the Council contacted a family member to ask whether they would consider caring for one of his children under a Special Guardianship Order without first seeking Mr X’s permission to do so. He also complains about the impact of this on himself and his partner.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating; or
• 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 considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mr X complained to the Council about the matter set out in paragraph one, above.
8. The Council told Mr X that, in line with its complaints policy, it could not consider his complaint via its complaints procedure because the case is subject to ongoing court proceedings. It advised Mr X to raise his concerns with his legal representative so that they can be considered by the judge during the proceedings. It signposted Mr X to this office if he remained dissatisfied with its response.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the Council’s decision not to consider his complaint whilst there are ongoing court proceedings. This decision has been made in line with the Council’s published complaints and representations policy and the statutory guidance to local authority children’s services on the handling of complaints where there are ongoing proceedings, including court proceedings. This is to ensure the court proceedings, which must take precedence over any complaint investigation, are not at risk of being prejudiced by a concurrent investigation.
10. Also, the issue raised in the substantive complaint is a data matter which is best considered and decided by the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). It is the body set up to consider complaints about data matters such as this and so it is best placed to consider it.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation and the substantive issue is a data matter best considered by the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman