Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s failure to provider her a washing machine and its complaint handling after she contacted the Council. That is because there is insufficient evidence of outstanding significant injustice to justify our involvement.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council failed to respond to her complaint about its failure to provide her a washing machine correctly. She said the wrong service investigated and its communication with her was poor. She said that meant her complaint was unresolved. She wanted the Council to investigate her complaint properly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement,
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome,
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Miss X complained to the Council at the start of September 2021. She said it failed to provide her with a washing machine as it agreed in April 2021. She said she had emailed the Council at the time asking about the washing machine’s specification, but it had failed to respond to her.
7. The Council incorrectly passed that complaint to its Housing Service to resolve. The Housing Service contacted Miss X and said the complaint was not for them. It directed Miss X back to the Council’s website. The Housing Service also contacted the Council at the end of September and said it had wrongly taken Miss X’s complaint.
8. Miss X complained to the Ombudsman. As the same time, the Council passed the complaint to its Children’s Service. It contacted Miss X on 5 October 2021. It started a stage one complaint investigation. It sent that to Miss X on 18 October 2021. It did not uphold her complaint.
9. Miss X sent the Council further emails on 22 October and 29 October. She raised additional complaints to the Council about its communication and that it had breached data protection regulations. The Council emailed her on 5 November and said it would provide a stage two response within 40 working days. It provided that within the timeframe set out.
10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s complaint handling any further. Although there was an initial delay caused by the Council incorrectly allocating the complaint, any injustice caused by that delay is not significant enough to warrant further investigation. The Council has apologised for the delay and offered Miss X a remedy of £50. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. Miss X’s dissatisfaction about the Council’s stage one response is remedied by the Council completing a stage two investigation.
11. The Council’s stage two response upheld Miss X’s complaint that it had not responded to her email about the washing machine’s specification. It also upheld other aspects of her complaint about how it had shared her personal details with the electrical appliance supplier. The Council set-out the steps it would take to address the faults identified from Miss X’s complaint. It also offered Miss X £200 to buy a washing machine. That puts Miss X back in the position she would have been in if it were not for the fault. Therefore, we will not investigate this further as there is not enough evidence of outstanding significant injustice that justifies our involvement.
12. Miss X also complained the Council breached data protection regulations. Complaints about data breaches are best dealt with by the Information Commissioner’s Office.
13. As we will not investigate Miss X’s substantive complaint, there are no good reasons for us to exercise our discretion to investigate her complaint about data protection.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because as there is insufficient evidence of outstanding significant injustice to warrant further investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman