Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Staffordshire Police and Crime Panel responded to questions raised by the complainant. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault with how the Panel dealt with the matter.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about how questions he raised to the Staffordshire Police and Crime Panel (the Panel) were dealt with. He says his questions were answered before the Panel had met, that the Panel members did not have sufficient background information relating to the questions and that the responses he received are insufficient and some contain inaccurate information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))
3. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner 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 the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. The Ombudsman previously considered a complaint from Mr X about how the Panel had considered a complaint he made about the Staffordshire Police, Fire and Crime Commissioner (the PFCC).
7. Mr X has since raised several questions to the Panel. I will not however investigate how the Panel handled these questions because there is insufficient evidence of fault in how it did so. The Panel’s website explains that when someone raises a question but is unable to attend in person, the answer will be presented to the panel. In this case all of Mr X’s questions were responded to and presented to the Panel members. No concerns about a lack of supporting information were raised and no other comments were made. A response to Mr X, providing answers to his questions has been provided to him.
8. Mr X may disagree strongly with some of the answers he has been provided, but that does not mean the Panel has done anything wrong. If he feels information is being withheld or inaccurate information is being held about him or his family, he can raise this with the Information Commissioner, who is better placed to deal with such matters.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman