Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s handling of Mr X’s telephone enquiry concerning a request for records. This is because we are unlikely to be able to add to the Council’s investigation already carried out and because there is a more suitable body to achieve his requested outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains about the Council’s handling of a telephone call and delays investigating his complaint.
2. Mr X says he has been caused frustration and uncertainty. Mr X wants a response to his request for information, an apology and consideration of a remedy.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organization;
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint;
• we cannot achieve the outcome requested.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X says a Council officer led him to believe, during the telephone call, that the officer would make enquiries to the environmental health department for the records Mr X was seeking. He complains that he was then told to submit a Subject Access Record (SAR) instead. Mr X says this is disproportionate for a simple information request.
7. Mr X also complains about delays in the Council’s complaints response plus he disagrees with the Council’s finding that its officer acted appropriately during the telephone call.
8. The Council’s complaints responses find its officer did not change his advice. It says it has listened to a recording of the telephone call. It says its officer explained to Mr X that they did not have access to environmental health records. The Council apologises for the delays in sending its responses.
9. We will not investigate. This is because we are unlikely to add anything more to add to the findings by the Council. The Council reviewed the call recording as part of its complaint process and concluded the adviser acted appropriately and in accordance with Council procedures. It has also provided a remedy for the complaint delays in the form of an apology. There is no indication that an Ombudsman investigation is likely to add anything more.
10. Mr X also seeks a response to his SAR and clarification about records held by the Council. Complaints about compliance with data protection legislation and subject access requests are matters more appropriately considered by the Information Commission (ICO), which has specialist powers and expertise in this area. The Ombudsman would not normally investigate where there is another body better placed to consider the issue. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to complain to the Information Commission concerning his request for records.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate because we are unlikely to add anything to the Council’s investigation plus there is another body better placed to consider.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman