The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council has refused to respond to his request for information and that it holds inaccurate information about him. This is because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider these matters.
The complaint
Mr X complains that the Council are holding inaccurate information about him and refusing to respond to his Subject Access Request (SAR). Mr X wants the Council to respond to his SAR and amend inaccurate information it holds about him.
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 another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) 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
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because it is reasonable to expect him to take the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). It is the appropriate body to review complaints about data protection, including how bodies respond to requests for information and requests to rectify records under General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider these matters
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman