Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about an officer allegedly breaching the complaint’s confidentiality and delays in the complaints process. This is because data breaches are better addressed by a more suitable body, the Council has apologised for the delay, and further investigation would not achieve a worthwhile outcome.

The complaint

1. In short, Ms X complains about the handling of a confidential complaint and the alleged disclosure of information.
2. Ms X says she has been caused distress, and she considers the issues affected related employment tribunal proceedings.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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 and/or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

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

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate a complaint if it is about a personnel issue. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5a, paragraph 4, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Ms X submitted a confidential complaint about the conduct of a named senior officer. She told the Council she expected the matter to be handled in line with the Council’s complaints process and data protection obligations.
9. In subsequent employment tribunal proceedings, Ms X says she became aware that her complaint details had been disclosed.
10. Ms X remains dissatisfied and says her complaint has not been handled in line with the complaints process and data protections obligations.
11. The Council has investigated Ms X’s complaint. It has apologised for the delay in the complaints handling. It says only the existence of the complaints was shared and not the details.
12. We will not investigate. The core issue of whether personal data was unlawfully disclosed is a matter being addressed by the Information Commissioner. It is the more suitable body to investigate as the regulator for information rights matters.
13. As for the remaining issue, the Council has already provided an apology for the delays in the complaints process. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve anything more.
14. Finally, matters related to the employment dispute and the evidence used in tribunal proceedings are outside of the Ombudsman’s remit.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint. The key issue of alleged data disclosure is being considered by the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is the appropriate body. While there may have been some delay in the complaints process by the Council, it has already provided a response and apology. An investigation by the Ombudsman is unlikely to achieve a meaningful outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman