Summary: We will not investigate this complaint the Council included incorrect information in a Child Protection Conference report. Further investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council included incorrect information about him in a Child Protection Conference (CPC) report. He said a third party shared this information which resulted in him losing his job.
2. Mr X also complained it took the Council nine months to complete a risk assessment on him. He said that impacted on his relationship. Mr X wants compensation for the harm caused by the Council and wants it to sack the Officers involved.

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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

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. In the Council’s response to Mr X, it said it received the information from another agency. It accepted there was limited context in the report around the information and agreed to update its records to provide context. It directed Mr X to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) if he remained unhappy with the information it held about him.
7. Although Mr X is unhappy with the Council’s response, we will not investigate his complaint for the following reasons.
• The Council took corrective action after Mr X reported his concerns about the information. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome.
• If Mr X is still of the view the information held by the Council is incorrect, he can escalate his concerns to the ICO. The ICO is responsible for overseeing how organisations handle people’s personal information and right to rectification requests.
• I appreciate Mr X said the incorrect information has resulted in his loss of job. However, the Council did not share the information outside of the CPC; that was done by a third-party. We cannot hold the Council responsible for the third-party’s actions.
• Mr X wants the relevant officer sacked. That is not an outcome we could achieve.
8. We will also not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council took nine months to complete a risk assessment on him. There is no evidence this matter has completed the Council’s complaint process. Mr X would need to exhaust that before we could consider the matter.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman