Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council failed to engage with his statutory notices or address his complaints. On one part, the complaint is better placed with the Information Commissioner’s Office. On the other part, there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly engage with his statutory notices about information and rectification of records. He also complains the Council did not address complaints he raised about procedural and administrative issues.
2. Mr X says the Council’s failures have prevented him from understanding or correcting records and decisions that affect him. He says this has caused him uncertainty and frustration.
3. Mr X wants the Council to acknowledge his statutory notices and complaints and provide him a substantive response.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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:

• 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))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
6. I also considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. The statutory notices Mr X refers to relate to access to information and rectification of Council records. Complaints of this nature are better placed with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
8. The ICO considers complaints about access to information and alleged data breaches. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about access to information, we normally consider it reasonable to refer the matter to the ICO. As the ICO is better placed to consider this complaint, I will therefore not investigate it.

Complaint response

9. The Council’s complaint response explains the reasons it could not share information with Mr X’s child. It also explained that it could not address some of the matters Mr X raised because it had previously considered those concerns and because they were older than 12 months.
10. I am satisfied the Council considered the concerns Mr X raised and made conclusions it was entitled to reach. It has explained the reasons for doing so. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s complaint response to justify us investigating.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because one part is better placed with the ICO and there is not enough evidence of fault by the Council on the other part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman