Summary: We will not investigate part of Mr X’s complaint about support provided to him as a child because the complaints were either previously considered by the Ombudsman or they are late. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about data handling because the Information Commissioner is better suited. We will also not investigate the complaints because it is reasonable for Mr X to use his right to take the matter to court to secure the outcome he seeks.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about:
1. historic care from the Council when he was a child, including harm he experienced at school and the Council’s failure to provide care to him;
2. the Council’s decision to issue him with, and then withdraw, a payment card in 2018;
3. how the Council managed his data, including concerns about record keeping, data manipulation, and a failure to disclose information as part of a Subject Access Request (SAR);
4. a conflict of interest from an advocacy service – Mr X said the service was undergoing a re-tenure process with the Council and this raised concerns about impartiality; and
5. the Council’s failure to support his access to counselling and mental health services in 2023.
2. Mr X said the matters caused him distress, frustration, and time and trouble.
3. Mr X wants the Council to pay him significant compensation for the injustice he says he experienced.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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)
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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint; or
• the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met.

(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

Background

9. Mr X previously brought a complaint to the Ombudsman about similar matters including care he received from the Council when he was a child. The Ombudsman made a Final Decision in 2020 about those matters.

Historic care from the Council when he was a child, including harm he experienced at school and a failure to provide care to him

10. We will not investigate these complaints. Most of the matters Mr X complained about either have been, or could have been, included in the complaint to the Council and subsequently to the Ombudsman in 2019/ 2020.
11. For the matters that were previously considered, we will not investigate those matters again. If Mr X remains dissatisfied with the remedy provided, it is reasonable for him to take the matter to court to secure the outcome he seeks.
12. For any other matters that are separable from those previously considered, Mr X was aware of the issues during his previous complaint to the Council and subsequent complaint to the Ombudsman in 2019/ 2020. Mr X was aware of these issues more than 12 months before he brought his new complaint to the Ombudsman. Consequently, the complaint is late. We will not investigate because there are no good reasons to exercise discretion.

Decision to issue and then withdraw a payment card in 2018

13. We will not investigate this complaint. Mr X was aware of these issues at the time and during his previous complaint to the Council and later the Ombudsman. I have seen no good reasons Mr X could not have complained about these matters sooner.
14. Mr X was aware of this issue more than 12 months before he brought his new complaint to the Ombudsman. Consequently, this complaint is late. We will not investigate because there are no good reasons to exercise discretion.

How the Council managed Mr X’s data, including concerns about record keeping, data manipulation, and a failure to disclose information as part of a Subject Access Request (SAR)

15. We will not investigate these complaints. This is because any issues relating to data processing, handling and any disclosures under a Subject Access Request would be better considered by the Information Commissioner.
16. Parliament created the Information Commissioner to consider complaints of this type, and it is better suited than the Ombudsman to investigate the matters complained about.

Advocacy service and impartiality

17. For any issues relating to advocacy services provided before 2020, the complaint is late. Mr X was aware of this issue more than 12 months before he brought his new complaint to the Ombudsman. We will not investigate because there are no good reasons to exercise discretion.
18. For any advocacy services provided after 2020, we will not investigate this matter. The injustice Mr X said he faced was uncertainty about whether the service supported him in an impartial way. There is not enough evidence to suggest Mr X was caused a significant injustice by the Council, therefore we will not investigate this complaint.
19. In addition, we would not investigate this complaint because the primary outcome Mr X seeks is significant financial compensation. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to include this information as part of any compensation claim with the courts. The courts can then consider the impact this had on Mr X.

Access to counselling and mental health services in 2023

20. Mr X complained the Council failed to organise and provide access to mental health services in 2023. Mr X said he requested input but did not receive a response for several months. In August 2023 the Council organised a meeting with him. It signposted him to his GP and provided access to another service for 12 months.
21. We will not investigate this complaint. Any alleged delay in providing support for Mr X is not significant enough to warrant our involvement. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the support that was later provided to Mr X to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Desired outcome

22. Even if we decided to exercise discretion on parts of the complaint above, we still would not investigate. This is because Mr X seeks compensation for harm he experienced as a child.
23. Where we find fault and recommend a payment it is often a modest amount whose value is intended to be largely symbolic, rather than purely financial. It is not our role to assess economic losses or award compensation. This is a matter for the courts.
24. Because the outcome Mr X seeks is significant financial compensation it is reasonable for him to take the matters complained about to court. The court can then determine whether any financial compensation is owed.

Back to top

Final decision

25. We will not investigate most of Mr X’s complaint because the tests in our Assessment Code are not met. We will not investigate the remainder because it is reasonable for Mr X to use his right to take the matter to court to secure the outcome he seeks.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman