Summary: We cannot investigate this complaint about the Council’s child protection involvement with Mrs X’s family. The family courts have considered the case, so the law prevents us from investigating the matters Mrs X complains about. The Information Commissioner is best placed to consider how the Council handled Mrs X’s data.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council:
• wrongly recorded child protection concerns as arising from her mental health;
• included speculative and unverified information in a report;
• ignored professionals’ concerns and coercive control towards Mrs X from her ex-partner; and
• shared her personal information with her ex-partner and the police.
2. Mrs X said the matter had caused her significant distress and reinforced the coercive control. She also said it had caused risk to her and her child, and influenced police investigations and family court proceedings. Mrs X wanted the Council to make service improvements, correct its records and share the corrected reports with the relevant agencies.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. The courts have said we can decide not to investigate a complaint about any action by an organisation concerning a matter which the law says we cannot investigate. (R (on the application of M) v Commissioner for Local Administration [2006] EHWCC 2847 (Admin))
5. 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

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs X’s complaint relates to the Council’s involvement in her child’s case. The concerns she has raised relate ultimately to alleged bias by the Council, and the subsequent representations it made to the family courts.
9. The law prevents us from investigating what happens as part of court proceedings. We have no power in law to investigate the content of the Council’s report submitted to court. All points of Mrs X’s complaint are inextricably linked to the court proceedings. The alleged outcome of any actions of the Council outside of the courtroom is ultimately the content of the representations it made to court.
10. While the court’s role is not to decide whether the Council was at fault, Mrs X’s concerns about bias are directly relevant to how the court considers the Council’s representations. It is open to Mrs X to raise her concerns via the courts, and only the court can reconsider the matter in light of those concerns.
11. Part of Mrs X’s complaint related to how the Council handled her personal information. The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) is best placed to consider complaints about data protection, so it is open to Mrs X to refer those parts of her complaint to the ICO.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We cannot investigate Mrs X’s complaint because the law prevents us from investigating matters that have been considered in court. The ICO is best placed to consider complaints about how the Council handled Mrs X’s information.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman