The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s process for registering for a recycling site permit. This is because any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council did not inform permit holders it had changed its access to recycling sites policy. He said there was no provision to register for access to recycling site offline.
He said he has concerns about putting personal information onto the internet due to potential criminal access. He wants the Council to allow residents to register without using the internet.
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: any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B)) 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.)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
Mr X complained the Council did not inform residents of a change in how to apply for recycling permits and that there is no option to apply without using the internet. In its complaint response the Council said it published advertisements in a newspaper, distributed leaflets and verbally promoted the new application process. The Council said it would work with residents who raised an accessibility barrier to ensure equal access. Further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
Our role is to consider complaints where the person bringing the complaint has suffered a significant personal injustice as a result of actions or inactions of the Council. Any injustice to Mr X is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
If Mr X is unhappy with information requested by the Council and believes it has applied data protection legislation incorrectly, that would be matter for the ICO.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because any injustice is not significant enough for our involvement.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman