The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council is holding and processing inaccurate information about the complainant. This is because the Information Commissioner is better placed to consider the matter.
The complaint
Mr X complains that the Council is holding and processing inaccurate information about him which he says has tarnished his name and affected a job application.
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 Mr X has the right to ask the Council that records are ‘rectified’. This means any factual errors are corrected. If the Council refuses to do so, he can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parliament set up the ICO to consider data protection disputes which includes ‘right to rectification’ disputes. The ICO are better placed than us to consider if the Council should change its records.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the ICO are better placed to consider the matter.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman