Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council handled its investigation into antisocial behaviour. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault to investigate some parts of the complaint and other parts are best considered by the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council misled him when it installed a recording device in his home as part of its antisocial behaviour investigation. He also complains the Council failed to respond to his information request and review evidence he provided in support of enforcement of an abatement notice.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So, where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained the Council gave him misleading information about the recording device in his home. He also complained about how the Council handled his Freedom of Information request. I will not investigate these complaints as Mr X can approach the Information Commissioner about these matters.
7. Mr X complained the Council refused to review the evidence he provided in support of enforcement action after the Council issued an abatement notice. The Court considers prosecution action. The Council said it could not use the information in court and therefore asked Mr X not to send it more.
8. The Council said it would make an assessment after it did five unannounced visits. I will not investigate this complaint. Based on the information I have seen, there is not enough evidence of fault with the Council’s actions to justify an investigation by the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about information the Council provided, or his information request because Mr X can approach the Information Commissioner. There is insufficient fault to justify an investigation into the Council’s handling of the enforcement of an abatement notice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman