The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a data breach. This is because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the matter.
The complaint
Mr X complains that the Council breached the General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR) in relation to the handling of his personal information. Mr X seeks compensation.
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: we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.
(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) 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)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that the Council breached GDPR in relation to how it handled his personal data. This is because it is reasonable for Mr X to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The ICO is the regulator for information rights, and it is best placed to consider whether the Council has safeguarded Mr X’s personal data in line with its data obligations.
Furthermore, we cannot achieve the outcome sought in terms of compensation for Mr X. Only the courts can adequately assess a claim for compensation.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the ICO is better placed to consider the matter.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman