Summary: We will not investigate how the Council handled a complaint about a data protection matter as any remaining injustice caused to Mr X is not sufficient to warrant our further involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained to the Council about how it dealt with his request for it to erase the personal information it holds about him. Mr X is unhappy that the Council has said it will not investigate his complaint at stage two of its procedure. Mr X says this is corrupt and has caused him inconvenience.

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 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))
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.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X made a request to the Council for it to erase the personal information it held about him, but this request was refused. Mr X complained to the Council about this.
7. In its complaint response, the Council acknowledged that it had not properly handled Mr X’s request. It apologised for that and as Mr X had been put to the trouble of contacting the Council a further time, to get the matter rectified. The Council advised its complaint response was to be treated as a final response and that it would not take the complaint to the next level of its complaint procedure. The Council confirmed Mr X’s request had been passed to its Information Governance team and that it had taken steps to address the standard of the initial response with its staff.
8. I recognise Mr X remains unhappy about the Council’s response, but we will not investigate as any remaining injustice caused to him is not sufficient to justify our further involvement. The Council acknowledged its fault, apologised to Mr X and indicated it had addressed the matter with staff. We cannot add to this and any impact on Mr X from the Council not agreeing to investigate further is not significant.
9. If Mr X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s handling of his data protection request, he would be best placed to complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about this. It is the UK’s independent regulator in respect of data protection matters.
10. For these reasons, we will not investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any remaining injustice caused to him is not sufficient to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman