Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the disclosure of information. This is because we cannot achieve what the complainant wants.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council is at fault in breaching his confidentiality, and in reneging on an undertaking to keep him informed of his children’s birth mother’s location.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Ombudsman investigates 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 may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide:

• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint,

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.
5. The complainant has had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr B and his wife are the adoptive parents of two children. The children’s birth mother is assessed as posing a risk to children. Mr B says that, during the adoption process, the Council led them to understand that the birth mother would not be made aware of their name or where they live, and that they would be kept informed of her location. He complains that neither is the case.
7. Mr B says he is aware that the birth mother has tried to follow his wife on social media. He says this shows she knows their surname and asserts that this information is likely to have been disclosed by the Council. He wants the Council to acknowledge and apologise for the breach of confidentiality.
8. The Ombudsman will not pursue this aspect of Mr B’s complaint. Mr B may refer this matter to the Office of the Information Commissioner, who is better placed than the Ombudsman to deal with complaints about data protection and breaches of confidentiality.
9. With regard to the birth mother’s whereabouts, Mr B wants the Council to keep him informed of her home town. He also wants the Council to provide support in managing the risk she presents.
10. The Child Permanency Report (CPR) shows Mr B and his wife were told they would be kept informed of the birth mother’s location. I find that they therefore had a legitimate expectation that this would be the case. However, the CPR indicates that this was a decision made by a Multi-Agency Public Protection Agreement meeting, a body to which the Council is not party. It does not show that the Council undertook to provide this information.
11. Even if it could be shown that the Council was at fault in misleading Mr B, investigation by the Ombudsman is not warranted because it cannot achieve the outcome he wants. The Council and police have both expressed the view that it is not appropriate to disclose the birth mother’s home town. It is not for the Ombudsman to question the merits of this decision, or to intervene to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because investigation cannot achieve the outcome Mr B wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman