Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council dealt with a Community Trigger response for Anti-Social Behaviour. The Council accepted there was fault in the way it dealt with the request and held the case management review. It has since made changes to its procedure. Mr X also raised concerns about Data Protection, however he has raised these with the Information Commissioner’s Office. Any further investigation is unlikely to add to that already carried out by the Council or recommend a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council failed to properly deal with his request to activate the Community Trigger, namely the Council:
• Failed to let him attend the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review so he could put his view forward.
• Did not have a procedure where Mr X could challenge the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review.
• Did not consider the Equality Act 2010 or its Public Sector Equality Duty.
• Failed to follow its own internal procedures.
• Breached Data Protection by incorrectly processing his data following his activation of the Community Trigger.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we are satisfied with the actions a council has taken or proposes to take. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(7), as amended)
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 the information provided by Mr X and the Council. I sent a draft of this decision to Mr X and the Council and considered the comments received in response.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X activated the Community Trigger in October 2019 as he and his mother had experienced anti-social behaviour. The Council agreed Mr X’s case met the threshold for an Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review.
7. The Council carried out the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review in November 2019 and sent Mr X its findings and action plan. The neighbour Mr X made the reports of ant-social behaviour about moved out of the property in 2020.
8. Mr X was unhappy with the procedure the Council used to consider the matter under the Community Trigger. Mr X raised concerns about this with the Council in November 2020 and February 2021.
9. In December 2021, the Council considered the matter as a formal complaint. Mr X complained about the way the Council considered his request to activate the Community Trigger. Mr X said the Council:
• Did not let him attend the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review so he could not discuss his concerns with the panel.
• Did not have a procedure in place which allowed Mr X to challenge the outcome of the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review.
• Did not consider the Equality Act 2010 or its Public Sector Equality Duty as part of the Community Trigger process as it failed to consider his mother’s vulnerabilities.
• Breached Data Protection by incorrectly processing his data and not properly responding to a subject access request.
• Did not follow its own internal procedures for dealing with anti-social behaviour.
10. The Council’s final position on the complaint was that:
• It recognised it did not have documentation in place detailing the process for responding to a request to activate the Community Trigger. It acknowledged it did not give Mr X the opportunity to attend the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review. It also recognised it did not provide Mr X with a way he could challenge the outcome of the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review.
• The Council said it had approved a Community Trigger policy and worked with the charity ASB Help to develop this. The new policy included a procedure to review the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review.
• It considered the Equality Act 2010 and its Public Sector Equality Duty as part of the Community Trigger process as it invited mental health professionals to the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review and considered Mr X and his mother’s disabilities in its Community Trigger response. The Council said it also offered to provide information about support services for Mr X and his mother.
11. We do not propose to investigate Mr X’s complaint. The Council has already made changes to its internal policies around the Community Trigger and worked with the Charity ASB Help to do so. As a result, victims are invited to the Anti-Social Behaviour Case Review meeting and offered a way to review the outcome of this meeting.
12. In relation to Mr X’s concerns about data handling and Data Protection, he has already reported these concerns to the Information Commissioner’s Office. The Information Commissioner’s Office has powers to order public authorities to take action on data protection breaches or inaccurate data. The Ombudsman does not have such powers. I consider there are no good reasons for us to investigate this.

Back to top

Final decision

13. I will not investigate this complaint as the Council has made changes to its policy and procedures on the Community Trigger and further investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome for Mr X.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman