Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about some lost documents. This is because the Council provided a satisfactory response and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation. In addition, the complainant could complain to the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains the Council lost documents she submitted as part of her housing application. She says an apology is not enough and she wants the Council to provide alternative housing.

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 an investigation if we decide:

• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we are satisfied with the actions an organisation has taken or proposes to take.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6) & (7), as amended, section 34(B))

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner (ICO) 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 Ms X and the Council. This includes the complaint correspondence. I also considered our Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. In late 2023 Ms X submitted some documents in support of her request for medical priority with her housing application. The Council lost the documents in the internal post. Ms X says that, initially, the Council would not accept it had lost the documents.
6. Despite the missing documents, the Council awarded medical priority in January 2024 and backdated the award to November 2023.
7. In response to her complaint, the Council accepted her documents had been lost in the internal post although it was not sure what had gone wrong. The Council apologised and said it was reviewing its procedures and had already made some changes to improve security and document handling.
8. I appreciate the loss of documents will have been of concern to Ms X but I will not start an investigation because the Council has provided a satisfactory response. It accepted something went wrong, apologised and explained it is taking steps to improve its service. Once this response is taken into account, there is not enough remaining injustice to warrant an investigation. I say this because Ms X has not provided evidence that any harm has occurred due to the data loss, and because the Council awarded the medical priority. The loss of the documents is not grounds on which we could ask the Council to rehouse Ms X.
9. I also will not start an investigation because Ms X can complain to the ICO. It is reasonable to expect her to do this because the ICO is the appropriate organisation to consider complaints about the way a council has handled data.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate this complaint because the Council has provided a satisfactory response and there is not enough remaining injustice to require an investigation. In addition, Ms X can complain to the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman