Summary: Mr X complained on behalf of Ms Z that the Council’s delays in dealing with his request for a copy of CCTV footage led to it being deleted. Mr X said this negatively affected Ms Z’s insurance claim and her annual premiums have increased. The Council was not at fault. Mr X also complained about the Council’s failure to deal properly with his requests for updates and says this caused him frustration and unnecessary time and trouble. The Council has already admitted it was at fault and has apologised. It should also make a payment to Mr X and provide evidence it has used this case to learn lessons.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained on behalf of Ms Z that the Council delayed in dealing with his request for a copy of CCTV footage which led to it being deleted.
2. Mr X said this mean Ms Z was unable to provide evidence to support her claim that she was not responsible for a road traffic accident. As a result, her insurance premiums have increased.
3. Mr X also complained about the Council’s failure to deal properly with his requests for updates and says this caused him frustration and unnecessary time and trouble.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word fault to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
5. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I spoke to Mr X and considered his view of the complaint.
7. I considered the email and complaints correspondence between Mr X and the Council.
8. I gave the Council and Mr X the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

9. In September 2018, Ms Z was involved in a road traffic accident. Immediately after the incident, Mr X telephoned the Council on Ms Z’s behalf and asked if it would be possible to have a copy of the recording made by a CCTV camera which was positioned close to where the incident occurred.
10. The Council told Mr X he could download a CCTV request form from its website. He also had to submit £10 for each request to access CCTV recordings.
11. Mr X said he immediately completed the form and posted this, together with a cheque for £10, to the Council.
12. Mr X heard nothing further and so on 28 December 2018 he emailed the Council and asked for an update. Mr X then had to contact the Council three further times, on 1 February, 24 February and 27 March 2019 before he received a response. Mr X said that when he was able to speak to the Council, it told him that only the police were allowed to access CCTV footage.
13. The Council’s emailed response of 27 March 2019 said the relevant team manager would speak to the officer involved with Mr X’s case and would get back to him.
14. The team manager emailed Mr X on 8 May 2019. He said he had been unable to find any record of Mr X’s request form and cheque. He said he had spoken to the officer who should have dealt with his case whose only explanation was that he had overlooked Mr X’s emails. The team manager said “I am sorry that you have had this experience with the Council and that we were unable to provide [Ms Z] with the images she asked for and I do hope that any further engagement you have with us leads to a more positive outcome”.
15. The team manager confirmed in another email to Mr X on 10 May 2019 that the Council only kept footage for 28 days and so the recording Mr X wanted was no longer available.
16. On 14 May 2019, the Council emailed Mr X in response to further comments he made and said “We have failed to deal with your request properly, promptly and with courtesy… [we have] commenced a review of our process to update it and… [to use] the shortcomings identified in your complaint as a test case example in this”.
17. Mr X remained unhappy and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

18. Mr X said he posted the CCTV request form. The Council said it did not receive it. There is no evidence either way to say what happened. I will not investigate this further.
19. Mr X had to ask on four occasions for an update on his case. He says he was given different information from different officers about whether he could view the CCTV footage. He also was not clearly told until May 2019, around seven months after the Council had destroyed the CCTV footage, that it was no longer available. In total the Council took around eight months from when Mr X submitted his request to its last complaint response to deal with this matter. This is fault.
20. The Council has already admitted it was at fault in the way it handled Mr X’s case. It has apologised and said it will use this case to improve its services. However, it should also make Mr X a financial payment to remedy the injustice these faults caused him.

Back to top

Agreed actions

21. Within one month of the date of the final decision the Council has agreed to:
• pay Mr X £100 to acknowledge the unnecessary time and trouble the Council’s faults caused him; and
• provide the Ombudsman with evidence that it has carried out a review of its processes to help prevent similar faults occurring again.

Back to top

Final decision

22. The Council was at fault and this caused Mr X an injustice. It has agreed to my recommendations. Therefore, I have completed my investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman