Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information the Council shared with the complainant and the way it dealt with her subsequent complaint about the matter. This is because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs X, complains that the Council was at fault in sharing information with her given to it by the police. She further complains that it was at fault in dealing with her complaint about the matter.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mrs X’s husband was a victim of murder in 2019. The day before he was killed, the Council issued a threat to life notice to him. Mrs X says a Council officer gave her information relating to the circumstances which led her to believe the threat was not as immediate as it was, and which the police subsequently told her she should not have been given.
6. Mrs X’s husband was killed the following day while waiting for one of their children. Mrs X says the information the Council’s officer gave her, which she passed on, led her husband be less concerned about his security than he would have been without it. She says he would have been more vigilant and would not have been with any of their children. She argues that the outcome could therefore have been different.
7. Mrs X complained to the Council. She is critical of the Council’s response, both in terms of the findings on the substantive issue and the length of time the Council took to carry out the complaints procedure.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we would be unable to add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out. The Council found that its officer was not at fault in sharing the information, and had the police’s agreement to do so. Whether or not this is the case, the Ombudsman could not make a safe finding that this contributed to Mrs X’s husband’s death. A court may be able to establish this definitively. The Ombudsman cannot, and there is nothing to be gained from our intervention.
9. Mrs X says she wants a copy of the document on which the Council relied in making its finding. She is entitled to ask for any document she believes she has a right to see by making a Subject Access Request to the Council.
10. The Council has accepted that it was at fault in the handling of Mrs X’s complaint, so there is no need for the Ombudsman to investigate to establish this. The Council has offered to pay Mrs X £1000 in recognition of fault in the complaints process. Mrs X regards this as insufficient, but it is in line with what the Ombudsman would be likely to recommend in the circumstances of the case. Our intervention would not achieve anything more.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman