Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council was at fault in its involvement with her family in the course of child in need and child protection action. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault on the Council’s part, or add anything to the investigation the Council has carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council was at fault in its involvement with her family in the course of child in need and child protection action.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or

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

3. 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

4. I have considered what Mrs B has said in support of her complaint and the documents she has provided. I have offered Mrs B the opportunity to comment on a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

5. A young person in Mrs B’s care was the subject of child in need and child protection action. In the course of the Council’s enquiries, social workers made a number of visits to Mrs B’s home. The third visit was unannounced.
6. During this visit, the young person left Mrs B’s care against the wishes of her father. She was subsequently voluntarily accommodated by the Council. Mrs B complained to the Council that, during the visit, the social workers were culturally insensitive and overreacted to the situation by calling the police. She says that, as a result of the police attendance, her family has suffered embarrassment and her children no longer interact with their peers locally. She says the family is considering moving away.
7. Mrs B further complains that the Council has breached her confidentiality by accessing the records of another authority, and by sharing her confidential information with a third party.
8. Mrs B made a formal complaint to the Council, which has completed the three stages of the statutory procedure for children’s services complaints. It was not upheld. Mrs B argues that the Council covered up its failings. She is also aggrieved that she was not permitted to be accompanied by an advocate at the Review Panel meeting at Stage 3 of the procedure.
9. Having considered the Council’s findings at Stages 2 and 3 of the complaint procedure I find that there are no grounds for us to investigate Mrs B’s complaint. Mrs B was able to give her view of the social workers’ actions, and the relevant Council staff were interviewed. At Stage 2 and Stage 3 the independent Investigating Officer and the members of the Review Panel considered the evidence before them and decided not to uphold the complaint. There is no evidence of fault in the way they did so.
10. Mrs B disagrees with the outcome of the complaint procedure. But that is not evidence of fault. Without evidence of fault in the way the decision not to uphold Mrs B’s complaint was made, the Ombudsman cannot criticise the outcome or intervene to substitute an alternative view. Investigation by the Ombudsman would therefore be unlikely to find fault or add to the investigation already carried out.
11. If Mrs B believes the Council has breached her confidentiality it is open to her to bring her concerns to the attention of the Information Commissioner, who is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider them. We will not intervene.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault, or add anything to the investigation the Council has carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman