Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council falsely issued a Fixed Penalty Notice against him. This is because the Council cancelled it during its own consideration of the matter and there is no remaining injustice to Mr X which is serious enough to warrant an investigation. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has not responded to his subject access request. This is because it is a data matter best considered by the Information Commissioner rather than this office.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council falsely issued a Fixed Penalty Notice (FPN) against him; did not respond to his subject access request (SAR) about it and did not respond to his complaint within the deadlines set.

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:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X complained to the Council that it wrongly issued him a FPN for alleged littering. He said he did not commit the offence and was not in the area at the time the FPN was issued.
7. The Council considered the information Mr X provided and decided to cancel the FPN.
8. Mr X submitted a subject access request on the matter and he complains the Council has not responded to it.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the issuing of the FPN. This is because the FPN has already been cancelled via the Council’s own consideration of the matter. There is no significant personal injustice remaining in relation to this point which is so serious that it warrants a further investigation by this office.
10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has not responded to his SAR. This is because complaints about data matters, such as this, are best considered and decided by the Information Commissioner’s Office. It is the body set up to consider such matters. We will not also consider it.
11. We will not investigate the complaint handling issues Mr X raised. We do not investigate complaint handling issues in isolation where we are not also considering the substantive complaint. This is because it is not a good use of limited public resources for us to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no significant personal injustice remaining in relation to the issuing of the FPN which is serious enough to warrant an investigation and the data matter is best considered and decided by ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman