Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about information the Council recorded about Ms X and her child in an assessment. Further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

1. Ms X complained the Council included exaggerated information about her and her child (Y) in an assessment.
2. Ms X said this caused distress and she wanted the Council to amend the records.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

4. 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

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. Ms X complained the Council exaggerated information from Y’s school and included it in an assessment. She said this led to the assessment showing a negative view of her parenting ability. Ms X said she got a letter from Y’s school to support her position.
8. In its complaint response, the Council acknowledged the assessment did not properly reflect the information provided by Y’s school. It said it would update Y’s file, so it correctly reflects the information provided by the school.
9. It also said a new social worker would complete an updated assessment.
10. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome here. The Council has agreed to update the record and complete an updated assessment. We would be unlikely to achieve anything further.
11. If Ms X remains dissatisfied with the information on Y’s file, she has the right to ask for the records to be ‘rectified’. This means any factual inaccuracies are corrected.
12. If the Council refuses to do so, she can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parliament set up the ICO to consider data protection disputes which includes ‘right to rectification’ disputes. The ICO is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider if the Council should change its records, particularly because there are complex exemptions for children’s services case files.
13. For these reasons, we will not investigate this complaint.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome and the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman