Source · LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman)

London Borough of Lewisham

LGO (Local Government & Social Care Ombudsman) Other Reference 24-001-186 Sector Adult Care Services Category Safeguarding Decided 23 June 2024

View Lewisham Council scorecard

Full decision

The Ombudsman's final decision

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a request for information. It is open to Mr X to make a request directly to the organisation that produces the report in question, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. If the organisation refuses the request, the Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider the matter.

The complaint

Mr X complained the paid Relevant Person’s Representative (RPR) for his brother’s Deprivation of Liberty Safeguards (DOLS) authorisation has refused to share their reports with him. He said as he lives abroad, this means he is not kept properly informed about his brother’s care. He said the Council told him it has no power to influence this. Mr X said he wants reports to be shared with him and for the RPR to be dismissed if they refuse his request.

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.

How I considered this complaint

I considered information provided by the complainant.

I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

My assessment

Mr X’s complaint concerns monthly reports written about his brother, by a paid RPR. The paid RPR service is provided by an advocacy service, commissioned by the Council but acting independently in Mr Y’s best interests.

It is open to Mr X to make a request for information directly to the advocacy service, under the Freedom of Information Act 2000. Given that Mr X’s complaint is about access to information only, and is not part of a wider complaint to us, the Information Commissioner’s Office is then best placed to consider the matter should the advocacy service refuse Mr X’s request. We will therefore not consider the complaint.

Final decision

We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider complaints about access to information.

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

View original on LGO (Local Governme… website

Other decisions involving London Borough of Lewisham

Reference Date Summary Outcome
25-008-753 Upheld
25-011-192 Upheld
25-018-847 Other
25-016-208 Other
25-004-042 Upheld
View all decisions for this organisation