The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council failing to update Miss X’s name on its systems after her gender reassignment. The county court and the Information Commissioner’s Office are better placed to consider complaints about potential discrimination and data breaches.
The complaint
Miss X complained the Council recently corresponded with her using her previous name from before her gender was reassigned. This caused her trauma and she wants the Council to acknowledge wrongdoing and make service improvements. She wants it to compensate her financially for the distress.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Miss X’s complaint concerns the Council’s failure to amend her name on its systems when she changed gender and its subsequent correspondence with her using her previous name.
The Council signposted Miss X to us after it finished considering her complaint. However, section 113 of the Equality Act 2010 provides members of the public with recourse to the county court for damages claims, if they believe they have suffered unlawful discrimination. The Information Commissioners Office (ICO) is the appropriate organisation to consider organisations’ application of the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) introduced under the Data Protection Act 2018.
We normally expect people to use their rights to alternative remedies and in this case, there is not a good reason for us to consider this complaint instead of these more suitable organisations. The issues are not part of a wider complaint about Council duties within our jurisdiction. There is a fee associated with applications to the county court, however the courts can consider claims for larger sums of compensation than the symbolic financial remedies the Ombudsman can recommend.
Miss X should therefore refer the matter to the county court and the ICO. She should do so as soon as possible, as time limits apply (for example, six months less one day to refer matters to the county court). These organisations can advise Miss X about whether they can consider the matter simultaneously or one after the other.
Final decision
We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because the county court and the Information Commissioner's Office are better placed to consider complaints about potential discrimination and data breaches.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman