Summary: There was fault because the Council did not stick to a commitment in how it would send Mrs X electronic messages. That fault caused Mrs X an injustice and the Council have already apologised and taken steps to minimise these incidences before our involvement. It has also offered to meet with Mrs X to propose a longer-term solution. I find these remedies are sufficient to address Mrs X’s injustice.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council repeatedly sent her secured and encrypted email communication, which means she is not always able to access these messages in good time. Mrs X said this continued to happen even after the Council made a commitment to her in August 2022 and then again in May 2023, that it would take steps to prevent this happening.
2. Mrs X said because of the nature of her contact with the Council, the fact she does not always have ready access to her messages, adds unnecessary delay and frustration.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused significant injustice, or that could cause injustice to others in the future we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
4. If we are satisfied with an organisation’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I spoke to Mrs X and considered the information she provided.
6. I considered the Council’s comments and the documents it provided.
7. Mrs X and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered any comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Principles of good administrative practice.

8. In 2018, we published guidance for Council’s in how we consider whether their actions amount to fault. In that guidance we emphasised (among other things) the following:
• Being service user focused by responding flexibly.
• Keeping to commitments.
• Ensuring the organisation learns lessons from complaints to improve services.

What happened

9. The Council sends certain emails containing personal data through an encryption system. This is to ensure the personal data is secure and only the recipient can read the email.
10. The nature of Mrs X contact. Mrs X told me she is in regular contact with the Council about two of her children who have special education needs (SEN) and some of this contact has been time critical because it relates to SEN tribunal matters. Mrs X said on occasions where she has no access to a suitable device, she cannot open the Council’s messages.
11. In August 2022, Mrs X made a complaint about this to the Council. She said despite repeatedly asking the Council to stop sending encrypted emails, and raising the matter at a public forum, the Council then sent her a further encrypted message.
12. The Council replied and apologised saying it was aware she had asked for unencrypted emails and had sent her one in error. It said it had reminded staff to check on how customers had specified their preferences for contact.
13. In May 2023, Mrs X complained again after the Council sent her several encrypted messages. The Council replied accepting two separate teams had been in touch and had sent Mrs X encrypted messages and it said this was an error. It reiterated its apology and said it had taken steps to minimise the likelihood of it happening again.
14. Mrs X complained to us and sent further evidence showing in July, the Council had sent her two encrypted messages, both relating to an annual (SEN) review for her children.
15. Following Mrs X’s complaint, I asked the Council to provide comment on the complaint and explain how it had taken steps to avoid sending encrypted messages. In its response it said:
• It had updated relevant case management systems to reflect Mrs X’s preference;
• Recirculated encryption guidance to all staff;
• It accepted the oversight in it sending the messages sent and this was partly due to sharing sensitive information.
16. The Council also offered to meet with Mrs X to discuss further data protection options that it believes may be available to reduce the likelihood of a reoccurrence.

My findings

17. Our guidance to Councils relating to good public administration emphasises the importance of being service user focused and keeping to commitments. The Council made a commitment to accept Mrs X’s contact preference and it did not do this. That is a fault which caused Mrs X an injustice because of avoidable frustration. The Council have apologised to Mrs X for this.
18. Mrs X also expressed a concern the Council repeatedly contacted her after its earlier commitments. Our guidance says we expect Councils to learn from complaints. From the evidence I have seen, I am satisfied the Council have taken appropriate steps to minimise the likelihood of contact, contrary to Mrs X’s preferences.
19. In addition, as part of its response to my enquiries the Council offered to meet with Mrs X after I have finalised my investigation, to discuss other options for contact, which is says will further reduce the chance of staff error.
20. Accordingly, because of its apology, the actions it has already taken (paragraph 15) and its commitment to contact Mrs X in line with paragraph 19, I find these actions are sufficient to remedy Mrs X’s injustice. Accordingly, I do not need to make any additional service improvement recommendations.
21. We understand Mrs X considers the matter a public interest because others have raised this issue with the Council. However, she has no authority to complain for anyone else.

Back to top

Agreed action

22. Within one month of the date of my final decision, the Council have agreed to discuss options with Mrs X for sharing information.

Back to top

Final decision

23. There was fault and I found this caused an injustice which has already been remedied before our involvement.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman