Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s handling of contact arrangements with his daughter. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council:
• poorly handled contact arrangements with his daughter, Ms Y,
• did not properly address a safeguarding concern he raised about a third party and,
• breached data protection law.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained,
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X was not happy to meet Ms Y in a coffee shop as suggested. And he was unhappy the Council did not support his request to wear a body camera during the meeting and for his support worker to attend.
7. In its complaint responses, the Council said it must tell Ms Y and her independent advocate of any contact proposal beforehand. This is to clarify expectations and any support needs that may arise during contact. It said Ms Y chose the meeting location and declined to attend any meeting with Mr X’s support worker present. No concern was raised regarding the body camera, though it remained for Ms Y to consider any contact proposed.
8. The Council said it must support and consider Ms Y’s wishes in any decisions. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to justify investigating.
9. Mr X says the Council did not safeguard a third party properly or provide him with a response to his referral. The Council said it was unable to share individual details about the case. It reassured Mr X that its social workers followed the appropriate process. I will not investigate this part of Mr X’s complaint as any injustice to Mr X is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
10. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to take his complaint about any data breaches to the Information Commissioner’s Office’s (ICO). It is the appropriate body to consider such matters.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman