Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to share certain information and documents. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider the complaint.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of his request to disclose certain documents and information related to potential legal action that he was considering against the Council. He complains the Council, instead, incorrectly treated his requests as a Subject Access Request (SAR) and Freedom of Information (FOI) request. He says the Council’s internal review letter shows this. Mr X complains the Council failed to follow the correct legal process, withheld information, ignored his clarifications on the matter, and prevented him accessing records relevant to ongoing legal matters.

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 late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

5. 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.
6. 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

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. So far as Mr X’s complaint concerns Council action from 2018 and his subsequent request for information about this in 2019, we will not investigate. This is because this complaint is late and there are no good reasons for us to investigate these matters now. Mr X first complained to the Ombudsman about these issues in November 2025. He could have complained to us much sooner if he wished for us to consider them.
10. In 2025, Mr X made a new request to the Council for certain information. Mr X thinks the Council should disclose this information because it has a duty to do so under the Civil Procedure Rules.
11. Based on the evidence I have seen, the Council progressed Mr X’s requests for information as a SAR and FOI request because Mr X had not yet started legal proceedings. It is unlikely we would find the Council at fault for taking this approach. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. In the event Mr X starts legal proceedings, we would have no power to investigate the Council’s response to any disclosure requests concerning the court action. This is because the law prevents us from considering matters related to court action. So, we will not investigate.
12. So far as Mr X complains about the reasons for the Council’s refusal to release certain information and documents under data protection and FOI law, we will not investigate this complaint. Parliament set up the Information Commissioner's Office (ICO) to consider data protection and FOI-related disputes, which includes disputes about whether the exemption based on legal privilege applies. The ICO is better placed than us to consider Mr X’s complaint about whether the Council should release the information and data requested.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s refusal to share certain information and documents. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider the complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman