Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about inaccurate recording of data in breach of data protection regulations. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider this.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained about inaccuracies in a report issued following a Multi-Agency meeting in November 2023, which he says led to him losing his employment and is continuing to affect his ability to secure employment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the police. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)
5. 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:

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

What happened

8. Mr X complained about inaccuracies in a report issued after a discussion in a Multi-Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC) in 2023, which he said he only became aware of in May 2025.
9. Mr X complained to the Council in May 2025. He said the inaccurate information amounted to a breach of data protection law because it was inaccurate.
10. The Council refused to investigate because it said the complaint was made too late as Mr X had been aware of the report since 2023. It also said the MARAC was police-led and most of the information he was challenging came from the police. It referred him to the MARAC coordinator.

My assessment

11. We would not usually investigate complaints about events more than 12 months before the complaint to us. However, in this case, Mr X says he only saw the report in May 2025, and complained to the Council and to us within 12 months of that, so the complaint is not late.
12. That said, the MARAC was police-led and, apart from one comment by a social worker, the inaccuracies complained about relate to information provided by the police. We have no power to investigate the police.
13. Further, from the complaint correspondence, it appears the report was prepared for court proceedings. The law says we cannot investigate complaints about court action, including about reports prepared for the court.
14. We also cannot say whether the Council or any other organisation is in breach of data protection law as that would be a decision for the courts to make. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider complaints about the accuracy of data and compliance with data protection regulations.
15. Finally, we would not be able to direct the Council to make changes to a report written some time ago. It is unlikely we would be able to establish, given the time that has passed, what the social worker said at the meeting or whether it was accurately recorded in the report. Nor could we ask the Council to change the report in these circumstances. For this reason, we could not achieve a worthwhile outcome, or the outcome Mr X wants, if we investigated the complaint.
16. For all these reasons, we will not consider the complaint further.

Back to top

Final decision

17. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Officer is better placed to consider complaints about data accuracy and data protection law.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman