The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered Mr X’s request to change its records and provide him with information. This is because there is another body better placed to deal with his complaint and it would be reasonable for him to make a complaint to that body. Nor will we investigate how the Council communicated with Mr X over this matter because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council have not taken action to clear his name after it recorded allegations about him historically, which he said were false. He also said it refused to engage with him about this more recently.
Mr X said the Council’s actions have had a significant impact on his mental health and he wants his record cleared and be compensated.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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 not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
In 2020 we issued a decision on a complaint Mr X made, about how the Council investigated historical allegations involving him. That decision also addressed how the Council responded to a request Mr X made in 2018, for the Council to change its records. We will not reinvestigate that part of Mr X’s complaint as we have already made a decision.
From November 2023 onwards Mr X asked the Council to provide him with correspondence it held, relating to his previous complaints. The Council told Mr X it had finalised his earlier requests as a subject access request (SAR) and referred him to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO).
We will not investigate Mr X’s new complaint about this, because the substantive matter relates to his dissatisfaction the Council will not change its records and how it had dealt with his SAR. The ICO is better suited to consider his complaint here and it is reasonable for him to make his complaint to the ICO.
Mr X also said the Council will not engage with him about this matter, because it placed restrictions on him contacting the Council. The Council wrote to Mr X and told him why it had taken this decision and there is not enough evidence of fault in its decision.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is another body better placed to consider his complaint.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman