Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint regarding the Council’s actions in relation to an alleged inaccurate record about the complainant. This is because the only issues that are not invalid, are out of our jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr S, says that:
• A social worker recorded an inaccurate version of his police record;
• The social worker made a false allegation of harassment against him following his attempts to challenge the alleged false record;
• He felt he was forced to take the Council to court regarding its handling of the harassment allegations. The court did not find in his favour and ordered him to pay £26,000 in costs, which he cannot afford;
• The Council continues to send bailiffs and demand he comply with a payment plan to recover council tax from 2008-14 that Mr S disputes he owes; and
• The Council has not complied with his subject access requests (SAR)s.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Mr S and by the Council. I also sent Mr S an initial view for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr S has made a series of complaints to us, but we are not able to investigate them.
7. Mr S says that a social worker recorded an inaccurate version of his police record. We will not investigate this, as it was previously considered and decided in an earlier complaint to us.
8. Mr S also says that the social worker made a false claim of harassment against him, when he tried to establish the truth about the alleged inaccurate record. We will not investigate this as it was previously considered and decided in a previous complaint to us.
9. He says that he was dissatisfied with the way the Council looked into the matter, and took it to court, leading to an award of £26,000 court costs against him, for which he blames the Council. We cannot consider this issue as it is regarding court proceedings and is therefore out of our jurisdiction.
10. Mr S additionally says that the Council continues to send bailiffs and to demand that he complies with a payment plan to recover council tax from 2008-14, which he disputes that he should owe. We will not investigate this part of the complaint, as the original tax dispute was previously considered and decided in an earlier complaint to us, and we are unlikely to find fault in the Council continuing to take recovery action.
11. Finally, Mr S complains that the Council has not properly responded to his SARs. We will not consider this issue as it is for the Information Commissioner's Office to look at such complaints.

Back to top

Final decision

12. I cannot investigate this complaint as the only parts that are not invalid, are out of our jurisdiction.

Investigator’s final decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman