The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council publishing the complainant’s personal information on its website. This is because the complainant has already complained to the Information Commissioner, who is best placed to deal with these matters. It would be reasonable for the complainant to pursue his claim for compensation through the courts. We cannot investigate the complainant’s concerns about how the Council dealt with his planning application. This is because he has already appealed to the Planning Inspector.
The complaint
The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, has complained the Council incorrectly published his personal information on its website. Mr X says he has been caused significant stress and the Council has failed to recognise the seriousness of the matter. Mr X has also complained about how the Council has dealt with his planning application. He says the Council should approve his application and compensate him.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We cannot investigate a complaint if someone has appealed to a government minister. The Planning Inspector acts on behalf of a government minister. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(b), as amended) 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 Mr X and the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council breaching data protection laws by publishing his details on its website. This is because he has already complained to the Information Commission’s Office (ICO). The ICO is best placed to consider matters such as this.
Mr X says the Council should compensate him for the breach. But I consider it would be reasonable for Mr X to go to court if he wishes to seek compensation from the Council for the distress caused by the claimed data breach.
We also cannot investigate Mr X’s concerns about how the Council dealt with his planning application. This is because he has appealed to the Planning Inspector and the Ombudsman cannot investigate matters where someone has already used their appeal right, even if the appeal will not address all the issues complained about.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because he has already complained to the ICO, and it would be reasonable for him to pursue his claim for compensation through the courts. We cannot investigate Mr X’s concerns about how the Council dealt with his planning application as he has appealed to the Planning Inspector.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman