Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s delay in providing information to Mr X. This is because the complaint does not meet the tests in our Assessment Code on how we decide which complaints to investigate. There is insufficient evidence of injustice to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. In short, Mr X complains about the Council’s delays in providing a document requested in his ‘Subject Access Request’. He believes the report was withheld due to issues he was having with his employer.
2. Mr X would like an apology and compensation for his time taken plus distress caused.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
4. 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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. It seems Mr X did not receive a response to his query email (pointing out a document was missing in the Council’s initial response) until two months later, in October 2024. However, the Council’s response in October provided the information he asked for. As Mr X received the information - albeit after a delay -there is insufficient evidence of an injustice here to warrant an investigation by the Ombudsman.
8. Further, it is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about side issues when the substantive matter is better addressed by a more suitable agency such as the Information Commissioner.
9. We do not usually consider any issues arising from a complaint where the main issue is better addressed by a more suitable agency such as the Information Commissioner. This applies to the issues raised here by Mr X (although in this case Mr X did not have to resort to complaining to the Information Commissioner to receive the documents in question).

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of injustice to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman