Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council recorded information following a safeguarding assessment or how it handled his complaint. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider this complaint and we will not investigate complaint handling as a stand-alone issue.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council acted wrongly in its safeguarding practice and handling of his complaint. He says the Council recorded inaccurate and unverified third-party information about him and his wife. He says the information recorded breaches data protection laws.
2. Mr X also complains the Council missed the stage one deadline in the statutory children's complaints procedure, failed to progress his complaint to stage two and wrongly stopped the statutory process.
3. Mr X says this has caused significant distress and reputational harm. He wants the Council to issue an apology, correct the information recorded, and carry out service improvements.

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))

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X complained about the accuracy of the information the Council recorded during a safeguarding assessment and its refusal to amend or remove that information.
9. The Ombudsman cannot determine whether an organisation has breached data protection law. If Mr X remains dissatisfied with the way the Council has handled his personal information, or with the accuracy of information it holds about him, he can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The ICO is the appropriate regulator and is better placed to consider those issues.
10. The Council considered Mr X's complaint under its two-stage corporate complaints procedure, which it completed, rather than the statutory children's complaints procedure.
11. We will not investigate this part of the complaint. Mr X's substantive complaint concerns the accuracy of historical records held by the Council rather than the provision of children's social care services.
12. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council's decision to deal with the complaint under its corporate procedure to justify an investigation. Where we are not investigating the substantive complaint, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate the Council's complaint handling as a stand-alone issue.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider this complaint and we will not investigate complaint handling as a stand-alone issue.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman