Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the contents of a Section 7 report and how the Council conducted safeguarding enquiries. This is because there is another body better placed to investigate Miss X’s complaint. Of the remaining element, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council incorrectly recorded inaccurate information about her in a Section 7 report. She also said the information about her is not relevant.
2. She said the Council breached her confidentiality by speaking with her brother before her about her being a victim of abuse.
3. She said the Council mishandled her complaint.
4. She said the Council caused her distress. She wants an independent manager to complete a practice review and make formal findings to acknowledge the social worker acted outside lawful and safe practice.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

5. 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)
6. 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
• 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

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. Miss X said the Council justified referencing her in a Section 7 report due to relevant safeguarding enquiries about children living in the same house. She said this was not a valid reason for her to be included in the report and referenced in court proceedings.
10. In its response the Council said it did not directly name her but referenced a history of violence in her family. The Council said if Miss X remained unhappy with how her personal information had been used, she could raise a complaint with the ICO.
11. If Miss X believes the Council had applied data protection legislation incorrectly, this would be a matter for the ICO.
12. Miss X complaint about the practice of a social worker. She said the social worker spoke to her brother initially when it was alleged she was the victim of abuse.
13. In its complaint response the Council said it had a duty to assess the transferable risks to children living in the household. However, it acknowledged that speaking with her in the first instance would have been best practice.
14. We will not investigate this complaint. The Council upheld this element of Miss X’s complaint and apologised. It said the social worker would undertake a reflective practice supervision around speaking with potential victims in the first instance when allegations are shared. This is an appropriate response form the Council and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
15. If Miss X remains concern with the practice of the social worker, she can make a complaint to Social Work England.
16. Miss X complained about the Council’s complaint handling process. 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

17. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is another body better placed to investigate it. Of the remaining element, further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman