Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of a Subject Access Request. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to decide this complaint.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council provided incorrect information about submitting a subject access request (SAR) for CCTV footage causing delay. She wants the Council to reimburse her costs and pay compensation.

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 there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. We do not start or continue 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. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X says the Council published an incorrect address for requests for CCTV footage, which led to delay, additional costs and her personal information being sent to the wrong address. She also says the Council gave incorrect information about who could request the footage and staff were rude when she contacted the Council.
8. We will not investigate this complaint. Mrs X’s complaint concerns the Council’s handling of her SAR and personal information. The ICO is the appropriate body to consider complaints about data protection and subject access requests. It has the expertise to decide such matters, and can make necessary recommendations. Mrs X has already complained to the ICO.
9. Mrs X also wants the Council to reimburse her costs and provide compensation. The Council has refunded the fee for the CCTV footage. Mrs X’s request for compensation is a matter best considered by the courts. The courts are better placed to decide whether the Council is legally liable for any loss Mrs X says she has suffered and can provide a suitable remedy.
10. Mrs X is also unhappy with the way the Council dealt with her complaint. But it is not a good use of public resources to look at the Council’s complaints handling, if we are not going to look at the substantive issue complained about. We will not therefore investigate this issue separately.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because it is about a data matter best considered by the ICO.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman