Summary: We cannot investigate Miss X’s complaint about how the Council safeguarded her when she was a Looked After Child and into her early adulthood. The complaint relates to events from more than 12 months ago and it is unlikely it would be possible to obtain the evidence to effectively investigate now. Additionally, the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the data protection part of Miss X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. Miss X complains the Council did not appropriately safeguard her when she was a Looked After child from the early 1990s, and into her early adulthood.
2. Miss X also says the Council lost all record of her having been a Looked After Child.
3. Miss X says this caused distress.

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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
7. 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

8. I considered information provided by Miss X.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. I have read the documents Miss X supplied to us regarding her childhood and understand that this will have been a challenging and difficult experience for her to complain to us about.
11. Miss X complained to the Council about her experiences in childhood and early adulthood. The Council told Miss X it held no record of her and said that there are no staff still within its employ that were in post at the time of Miss X’s complaint.
12. The more time passes between the events and a complaint, the more unlikely it is we can investigate them effectively, gather reliable evidence and reach a sound decision. In older cases, we also may not be able to achieve a meaningful remedy because too many circumstances have changed. We are often unable to be able to show why events occurred or understand who was responsible.
13. I have considered whether there are good reasons for us to exercise discretion to consider Miss X's complaint. The law, explained in paragraph five, says we should not investigate late complaints. I acknowledge Miss X's comments about why she did not feel able to raise these matters sooner, but this does not displace the expectation in law that we will not investigate. For these reasons, we will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint.
14. Miss X also complained about the Council not holding records of her time as a Looked After Child.
15. We will not investigate this part of Miss X’s complaint. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) enforces data protection legislation. The ICO is therefore better placed to consider and decide this part of Miss X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

16. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because it is late, and the ICO is better placed to consider and decide complaints about data protection.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman