Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint relating to freedom of information matters. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is the body best placed to consider it.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of, and response to, his complaint about its commissioned Children’s Services provider’s handling of his freedom of information request and delay in providing the outcome of the internal review. Mr X says the Council has denied him the proper route to complain by signposting him to the Information Commissioner’s Office rather than considering it via its complaints procedure.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 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)
3. We do not start an investigation if we decide there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

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. Mr X complained to the Council about its Children’s Services provider’s handling of his freedom of information request.
8. The Council told Mr X that complaints about freedom of information matters such as this were for the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) to consider. It signposted Mr X to that office and explained it would not consider it via its complaints procedure.
9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because the substantive complaint about freedom of information issues is best considered and decided by the ICO. Mr X has been correctly signposted there by the Council. We will not also consider it. There is also a right of appeal to the First Tier Tribunal against the ICO’s decision if Mr X remains dissatisfied with it. Whilst Mr X is also dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of his complaint we do not consider complaint handling issues in isolation where we are not also considering the substantive matter. This is because it is not a good use of our limited public resources for us to do so.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is about matters best considered and decided by the ICO and we do not consider complaint handling where we are not also investigating the substantive matter.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman