The Ombudsman's final decision
Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about his Subject Access Request and a breach of data protection. It is reasonable to expect Mr X to raise his concerns with the Information Commissioner’s Office and pursue financial compensation from the court.
The complaint
Mr X complained the Council delayed in providing him with information and documents following his Subject Access Request (SAR). He said it also provided wrong information about who held his records and breached data protection by sending him internal notes and communications.
Mr X said this caused emotional distress. He said the delay caused a financial loss of approximately £4,555.20. He wanted the Council to: compensate him £4,555.20; provide financial compensation for the distress and inconvenience caused; apologise in writing; and review its internal procedures.
The Ombudsman’s role and powers
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) The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)
How I considered this complaint
I considered information provided by the complainant.
I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
My assessment
We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about access to information or data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons.
The Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) holds more powers that the Ombudsman to address complaints about access to information and data protection. In this case there is no good reason for us to investigate the matter instead. In the absence of a wider complaint we could consider, the ICO is the best placed body to consider the issue.
Mr X is seeking financial compensation as part of the remedy to his complaint. The ICO cannot achieve this. However, an individual may go to court to claim compensation for damage and distress caused by a Council if they have breached the General Data Protection Regulation or Data Protection Act. It is open for Mr X to pursue this remedy via the court, so this is not in itself a good reason for us to investigate.
Final decision
We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because the Information Commissioner’s Office is the body best placed to consider the matter, and it is open to him to pursue financial compensation via the court.
Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman