Summary: Mr B complains the Council shared his personal information inappropriately. The Ombudsman will not investigate the complaint because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and Mr B can contact the Information Commissioner if he wishes to pursue the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to as Mr B, says the Council shared his personal information inappropriately by sending him a letter at an address he has never lived at or had mail directed to. He is concerned about the implications this may have for identity theft.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• it would be reasonable for the person to ask for a council review or appeal.

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

3. 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

4. In considering the complaint I have reviewed the information provided by Mr B and the Council. I gave Mr B the opportunity to comment on my draft decision and considered what he said.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B is a private landlord who owns Property X, a property for which he did not have a landlord selective licence as required under the Housing Act 2004.
6. The Council wrote to him at Property Y to tell him that he needed to apply for a licence. Although Mr B has never lived at Property Y or asked that mail be sent to him there, the letter nevertheless found its way to him.
7. Unhappy that the Council had written to him at Property Y, Mr B complained to the Council. He said mutual friends of the occupants had passed him the letter and that he wanted the Council to explain why it had shared his information with the people living at Property Y. He said he was concerned it had been improper to do so and that it could put him at risk of fraud.
8. The Council responded under the two stages of its complaints procedure and advised Mr B it had been given the address by a third party who had said Mr B could be contacted at that address. This proved to be correct. It explained it had a statutory duty to ensure Mr B had a licence for Property X and that it would use all contact details available to achieve this. It said the letter had been sealed and addressed to Mr B and it did not consider it had shared private information or breached the date protection regulations.

Assessment

9. The Council needed to contact Mr B to ensure he obtained the landlord licence required by legislation for Property X. It received details of an address at which he could be reached, and the Council reasonably made use of it, sending Mr B a sealed letter which was opened by the occupiers before they passed it on to him.
10. Mr B says he finds it hard to believe a concerned resident wrote to the Council giving Property Y’s address as a way of contacting him. However, I have no reason to doubt what the Council has said and clearly, as he received the letter, the information was correct.
11. I note Mr B’s comments that he was not seeking to avoid the licence fee and that he has had problems with the Council about other matters. However, I have seen no evidence of fault by the Council, nor injustice caused to Mr B, which would warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman in this case.
12. If Mr B believes a data breach has occurred, he can contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no evidence of fault by the Council and Mr B can contact the Information Commissioner if he wishes to pursue the matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman