Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council responded to a data handling request. This is because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, part of the complaint is out of time and there is another body placed better to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained that over a period of several years the Council did not provide accurate information he had requested.
2. Mr X said this caused distress and financial loss.
3. Mr X wants the Council to provide the documents he has requested, compensation and an apology.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

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)
6. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
7. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

8. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
9. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

10. Mr X made data requests to the Council in 2019 and 2023. At that time, he said the response did not provide all the expected information. He later complained to the Council about the process the Council had taken in handling his requests.
11. The Ombudsman will not usually exercise discretion to investigate matters that took place more than 12 months prior to the complainant becoming aware of them. In this case, Mr X received conflicting reasons why the Council did not hold a recording in July 2026. Therefore, we would only consider matters from July 2025 to July 2026.
12. In its response to Mr X, the Council provided a meaningful and timely apology for providing him with conflicting reasons why it did not hold a recording. The Council confirmed it did not hold the data Mr X had requested. It also advised Mr X he may bring his complaint to the Information Commissioners Office.
13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome. The Council apologised to Mr X for giving him conflicting reasons as to why it did not hold a recording. It clarified that it did not hold the recording requested.
14. Mr X's complaint is about access to information and data handling. He can complain to the Information Commissioner's Office about whether the Council has carried out adequate searches and disclosed all the information it holds about his requests. We will not investigate this complaint because the Information Commissioners Office is better placed to consider Mr X’s complaint.

Back to top

Final Decision

15. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, part of the complaint is out of time and there is another body placed better to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman