Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council carried out a foster carers assessment. This is because doing so would not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because the Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with complaints about data breaches.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about how the Council dealt with her application to become a foster carer. She says the Council committed a data breach by accessing records about her from another department and discriminated against her disability by using that information in its assessment.

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, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. In investigating Mrs X’s complaint, the Council spoke to one of the social workers involved in Mrs X’s application to become a foster carer, but the other social worker could not be spoken to because they would not be returning to that role.
8. The social worker spoken to by the Council said that a file from another Council department, containing information about Mrs X, was accessed but the information was not read and therefore not considered when making their decision to refuse Mrs X’s application.
9. Without any additional available evidence, we cannot say with any certainty that the information in question was read or not, and therefore investigation by us could not add to the one carried out by the Council. Also, for the same reason we could not say with any certainty that the Council treated Mrs X any differently due to her disability.
10. If Mrs X feels that the actions of the social workers constitute a data breach, it would be reasonable for her to raise this with the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) who is best placed to consider complaints about data protection matters.
11. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about conclusions reached by one of the social workers during their assessment of Mrs X’s application, and observations that were recorded during a home visit. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the social worker reached their conclusions and in the absence of fault we cannot question the merits of those conclusions. In the absence of any independent witnesses we cannot say with any certainty what the social worker recorded was different to what was witnessed or heard, so we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council.
12. Finally, I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how she was spoken to during a telephone call because this alone has not caused Mrs X a significant enough injustice to warrant our further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because doing so would not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because the Information Commissioner is better placed to deal with complaints about data breaches

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman