Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement in a special guardianship application. We cannot investigate matters involved in court proceedings. And the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider data protection breaches.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mrs X, complains about the Council’ conduct and handling of her special guardianship assessment.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. 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)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by Mrs X and the Council’s responses to Mrs X.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Mrs X says that a special guardianship order (SGO) application for her to be the guardian of a grandchild took two and half years longer than it should have. The Council’s assessments started in August 2020 and the Court made the final SGO in February 2023.
8. She says:
• the Council were initially unsupportive and had alternative plans. She says this delayed the process.
• the information the Council gave the court delayed the process.
• the Council was late in filing Court statements.
• the Council failed to allow her to have contact with her grandchild during the process.
• the Council made data protection errors, including giving information to foster carers about Mrs X, disclosing her address, and disclosing information about the foster carers to Mrs X.

Analysis

9. We cannot investigate the information the Council gave a Court. This includes how and why it was produced, any delays in its production or the methods the Council used to produce it.
10. We cannot investigate the Council’s actions which is to alleged to have caused Court delays.
11. Once the SGO proceedings started, or any other Court proceedings about the child’s care, the Court has the power to decide any interim contact. This means we will not look at any contact issues, Mrs X had during that period.
12. The Council says it has passed the data protection complaints to its information manager. Once they have replied Mrs X can approach the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). 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.
13. 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. I consider that to be the case here and Mrs X should therefore approach the ICO about her concerns.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mrs X’s children services’ complaint because we cannot investigate Court issues and the ICO is better placed to consider her data protection complaints.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman