Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council sharing Miss X’s personal information. The Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to deal with complaints about data protection. If we considered the complaint, we could not achieve a higher financial remedy than the Council has already offered, and the courts are best placed to consider compensation claims.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained the Council wrongly shared her personal information with a third party. She said the matter caused her significant distress and put her at risk. She wanted the Council to make service improvements and increase its offer of £500 to recognise the impact she said the matter had on her.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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)
3. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
4. 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, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Miss X’s complaint is about the Council wrongly sharing information with a third party, which she says led to threats made towards her. The Council considered the matter and offered her £500 to recognise the distress she had experienced.
8. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is normally best placed to consider complaints about how organisations handle people’s personal information. The ICO can investigate the matter, take enforcement action and issue financial penalties. However, it cannot award compensation. Given that Miss X has asked for the Council’s financial offer to be increased, I have considered whether it is reasonable for us to consider the matter instead of the ICO.
9. When someone has suffered an injustice, we try to put them back in the position they would have been had the error not occurred. Our focus is on restoring services that have been denied and taking practical steps to put things right. Where that isn’t possible, we will try to think of creative remedies that acknowledge the impact of faults.
10. Where that takes the form of 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, and we direct people to the courts where that is their primary goal. And, as a body focussed on individual justice and institutional improvement, we do not impose punitive fines for errors or take action to punish people.
11. Where we decide it is appropriate, we will normally recommend a remedy payment for distress of up to £500. The Council has already offered an amount to Miss X that reflects our Guidance on Remedies, and it has apologised. Further investigation by us would be unlikely to lead to different findings or a different outcome. The ICO is the appropriate body to seek improvements by the Council if necessary. Because of these points, we cannot achieve the outcome Miss X seeks.
12. Therefore, the ICO and the courts are best placed to deal with this complaint. It is open to Miss X to seek legal advice about the option of pursuing the Council for compensation.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Office and the courts are best placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman