The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a council employee wrongly sharing personal information. This is because the Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider complaints about data protection issues. The complaint is also linked to court proceedings which we have no powers to consider.
The complaint
The complainant, Mr X, says a council social worker wrongly disclosed his personal information to a third party. The information related to court proceedings. Mr X says the disclosure led to him losing his job. Mr X also complained an interpreter was not provided during the court hearing, placing him at a disadvantage.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) 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) We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We will not start an investigation into Mr X’s complaint.
The allegation a social worker wrongly shared information is about the Council’s failure to properly handle personal data.
The ICO is the UK’s independent authority set up to uphold information rights. It promotes openness by public bodies and protects the privacy of individuals. It deals with complaints about public authorities’ failures to comply with data protection legislation. This includes disclosing information in error.
There is no charge for making a complaint to the ICO, and its complaints procedure is relatively easy to use. Where someone has a complaint about data protection, the Ombudsman usually expects them to bring the matter to the attention of the ICO. This is because the ICO is in a better position than the Ombudsman to consider such complaints. Mr X should therefore approach the ICO about his concerns.
The law prevents the Ombudsman from considering matters discussed in court. The social worker’s actions would seem to relate to such matters as Mr X says they were in contempt of court. So, even if the ICO were to refuse to investigate, we would not be able to consider this issue. Whether an interpreter should have been provided during the court proceedings is also outside our jurisdiction for the same reason.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. The ICO is best placed to consider complaints about data protection issues, and we cannot consider matters discussed in court.
Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman