Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about housing advice provided by the Council and the conduct of officers. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council, and because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response. In addition, the complainant could complain to the Information Commissioner.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Ms X, complains about the service she received when she asked the Council for housing advice. She wants the Council to hire people who can do the job properly.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation.

(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 (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. Ms X sold a property and temporarily moved in with family. She says she cannot afford to buy a new home. Ms X contacted the Council for housing advice.
6. Ms X spoke to two officers and received a written summary of the housing advice. The advice noted that Ms X has financial resources following the sale of the property which means the help the Council can offer is limited. The Council said Ms X could apply to join the housing register but she would be placed in a low band due to her finances. The Council said renting in the private sector would be her fastest route to re-housing and it signposted her to some websites.
7. Ms X complains about the advice she received. She also complains the officer asked about her immigration status and whether she speaks English. Ms X says the Council asked for too much information and breached the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR). She says the Council did not provide a service and officers were offensive.
8. In response, the Council explained that it asks about immigration status because this information is needed to assess eligibility for some help. It said it asks whether someone speaks English in case they need an interpreter. The Council confirmed it had provided the correct housing advice. The Council said it could not listen to the call because calls that have been transferred are not recorded. The Council said it had checked the notes and there was nothing to suggest any offensive or inappropriate behaviour by any officer. The Council said two officers recorded in their notes that Ms X had been aggressive and was shouting.
9. I will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and because, due to the absence of a call recording, there is no further evidence we could consider. I acknowledge that Ms X’s perception of the call is different to what is recorded in the notes. But we make evidence based decisions and, in the absence of additional evidence, it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response.
10. Further, the housing advice that was provided was correct and there is nothing further the Council could have said in terms of options. It is correct that some housing services may be restricted due to immigration issues so there is nothing to suggest fault in the Council asking about this. The Council explained why it asks whether English is spoken and there is no evidence anyone said Ms X does not speak English as she has alleged.
11. Finally, Ms X can complain to the ICO if she thinks the Council breached the GDPR. It is reasonable for her to do this because the ICO is the correct organisation to consider GDPR complaints.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council and it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response. In addition, Ms X could complain to the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman