Summary: The Ombudsman does not propose to investigate Mrs X’s complaint about access to information from when she was in the care of the local authority. Mrs X’s complaint is late, and she has already complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office. It is unlikely we could add anything to the responses Mrs X has already received.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains the Council has not provided copies of records from when she was in the care of the local authority between 1962 and 1977. Mrs X says she first complained 19 years ago. Mrs X wants compensation for the Council’s failure to provide the information she has asked for.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. 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:

• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

4. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) 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 Mrs X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information she provided. I also gave Mrs X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on her complaint.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs X was in the care of the local authority between 1962 and 1977. Mrs X says she first tried to access information about her time in care 19 years ago. Mrs X says the Council has not been able to provide the information and has said the records were destroyed in a fire. Mrs X says because of the lack of records she does not have any information about her early life and family history. Mrs X says she has contacted the ICO and it decided the Council had failed to properly handle her personal data. Mrs X wants the Council to pay compensation. The Council says it has told Mrs X that a claim for compensation needs to be made through its insurance team.
7. I understand the issue at the heart of Mrs X’s complaint is important to her. But the Ombudsman normally expects people to complain to us within twelve months of them becoming aware of a problem. We look at each complaint individually, and on its merits, considering the circumstances of each case. But we do not exercise discretion to accept a late complaint unless there are good reasons to do so. I do not consider that to be the case here. I see no reason Mrs X could not have complained much earlier, and so the exception at paragraph 3 applies to her complaint.
8. But even if Mrs X’s complaint was not late, it is not one we would investigate. The ICO is the body set up by Parliament to consider complaints about data protection and access to information. It is an expert, impartial body, and the Ombudsman normally expects people to contact the ICO if they have a complaint about access to information. Mrs X has already contacted the ICO and it is unlikely we could add anything to its response. Also, if the Council no longer holds the information Mrs X would like access to, it is difficult to see what an investigation by the Ombudsman could achieve. Claims for compensation are for insurers, and ultimately the courts. It is open to Mrs X to make a claim against the Council if she wants to pursue compensation. This is not something the Ombudsman could achieve for Mrs X and so an investigation is not appropriate.

Back to top

Draft decision

9. Subject to any comments Mrs X might make, my view is the Ombudsman should not investigate her complaint. This is because the complaint is late, and Mrs X has already complained to the Information Commissioner’s Office. It is unlikely we could add anything to the responses Mrs X has already received.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman