Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the complainant’s time in care. This is because the events happened too long ago, and I see no good reason to exercise discretion. The Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the complainants concerns about how their information has been stored and how their information requests have been dealt with.

The complaint

1. Ms X and Ms Z complain that the Council failed to protect them from abuse whilst they were in care in the 1970s and 1980s. They also complain that the Council has lost Ms Z’s care records, how it has responded to their Subject Access Request (SAR) and that the Council failed to offer Ms X support when it provided her care records.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. I will not investigate Ms X and Ms Z’s complaints about how the Council has dealt with their SARs and that it has lost Ms Z’s care records. This is because it is reasonable for them to pursue these matters with the Information Commissioner. The Information Commissioner is better placed to consider complaints about how authorities store and share information and has powers to compel disclosure of records.
8. I will not investigate that the Council failed to support Ms X when it disclosed her care records. Since the records have been shared, the Council has met with Ms X and signposted her to support and legal services. Even if we were to find fault, I do not consider that any recommended action would be significantly different to what has now occurred and therefore further investigation into this point would not lead to a different outcome.
9. Ms X and Ms Z’s complaint about abuse they suffered whilst in care is historic. Complaints about things happening more than 12 months ago are late. We can only dis-apply the late rule if we are confident that there is a realistic prospect of reaching a sound, fair, and meaningful decision and we are satisfied that the complainant could not reasonably be expected to have complained sooner.
10. I will not investigate this element of Ms X and Ms Z’s complaint because I am not satisfied that their complaint passes these tests. This is because:

• The complaint is about matters that happened some 40 years ago and I see no good reason why these matters could not have been raised sooner.
• It would be difficult to establish the meaningful facts with reasonable confidence. This is because not all records are available, and staff involved with the case at the time have since left the Council’s employment.
• The gap in time makes it difficult to achieve a meaningful remedy.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Ms X and Ms Z’s complaint because it is made late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion, because an investigation would not lead to a different outcome and because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider complaints about data protection.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman