Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about an alleged breach of his personal information and the accuracy of information held by the Council. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice to Mr X. If Mr X has continuing concerns about the accuracy of information held by the Council, he can contact the Information Commissioner’s Office.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council sent a letter about an alleged overpayment of housing benefit to his old address. Mr X is concerned other departments hold incorrect information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (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 Mr X’s complaint to the Ombudsman and the information he provided. I also gave Mr X the opportunity to comment on a draft statement before reaching a final decision on his complaint.

Back to top

What I found

5. The Council says it did write to Mr X about his housing benefit using an old address. When Mr X contacted the Council to say he had not received the letter, it reissued it to the correct address. The Council says it now has the correct address for Mr X on record for housing benefit.
6. Mr X says he is concerned the Council holds the wrong address on different systems – resulting in poor administration.
7. The role of the Ombudsman is to look for administrative fault. We do not look at all the complaints we receive. In deciding whether to investigate, we need to consider the level of fault and alleged injustice to the person complaining. We only investigate the most serious complaints.
8. I understand Mr X’s frustrations, but I do not think there is enough evidence of serious fault by the Council, or injustice to Mr X, to warrant an investigation. Also, the Council says it now holds the correct address on its housing benefit system, so it is difficult to see what more an investigation could achieve. I have not seen any evidence the Council holds wrong information on other systems. With no evidence of injustice to Mr X, an investigation is not appropriate.
9. If Mr X has general concerns about how the Council is managing his personal data, he could 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, holding inaccurate information, and wrongly disclosing a person’s data.
10. I understand Mr X is unhappy with the way the Council has dealt with his complaint. But we will not investigate a council’s complaint handling if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. This applies here.

Back to top

Final decision

11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault causing significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman