Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint the Council harassed him to provide information for the electoral register and misused his personal data. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation, and the Information Commissioners Office is better placed to deal with complaints about data protection.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council has harassed him into joining the electoral register and wants this to stop.
2. He said the Council has committed data protection offences by giving his details to third parties.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint

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

4. 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.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the Mr X and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In September 2024 Mr X told the Council he wanted to opt out of the electoral register. The Council told Mr X that he was not registered to vote and provided information about registration and the opting out options.
8. Mr X says he continued to receive electoral register information and requests. He says these said he will be fined if he does not provide requested information.
9. The Council said it added his details to the database but not the electoral register after Mr X contacted electoral services. As a result, he became a potential elector and had been contacted in accordance with the electoral commission guidance.
10. In its complaint responses, the Council said when Mr X chose to opt out, his email should have been removed and he should not have received an invitation to register. It apologised, said it had made a report to the Data Protection Officer (DPO) and provided Mr X with details for the ICO. It said he was not currently registered to vote.
11. The Council said that political parties could be using historical or alternative sources of information to contact Mr X. It said this was the responsibility of the political party data controller. It said there was no further evidence that Mr X’s personal data had been disclosed by the Council.
12. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to contact the ICO. The ICO is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation. This includes disclosing information in error.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner Office is better placed to deal with data protection concerns.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman