Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about providing proof of address or identity to use the recycling centres. This is because there is insufficient evidence of injustice and the complainant can complain to the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I refer to as Mr X, complains staff ask for proof of identify or address to use the recycling centres when there is no policy requiring this. He says this puts his data security at risk.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• 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))

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 Mr X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence and FOI replies. I also considered our Assessment Code and invited Mr X to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The recycling centres are for use by Essex Council residents. Staff at the centres may ask for proof of address or identity to ensure this is maintained. This is explained on the Council’s website.
6. Mr X objects to providing personal information. He says it causes delays in using the site and could put his personal data at risk. He also says there is no policy requiring people to provide personal information.
7. In response to his complaint the Council referred to its website and explained people may be asked to provide personal information to ensure they live in the county. In response to his FOI request it said there is no specific policy but also referred to the website which explains the policy for using the site. The reply also said councillors had approved checks at some sites. The Council explained no data is kept and there is no onwards use of the data.
8. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice. Mr X says there is no policy but the website explains that personal information may be requested to ensure that only people who are entitled to use the centres do so. I appreciate Mr X disagrees but the impact of being asked to prove eligibility to use the site does not represent an injustice which requires an investigation. Showing a form of ID or address takes a matter of minutes and if Mr X thinks the Council is putting the security of his personal data at risk then that is a matter for the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice and because Mr X could complain to the Information Commissioner.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman