Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s actions following an allegation made against the complaint. This is because there is no prospect that investigation by the Ombudsman would conclude that the Council’s actions caused Mr X the injustice he claims.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council was at fault in the production of a children and family assessment and in closing his children’s case.

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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X says his former partner made a false allegation against him, which resulted in the police removing him from their home and imposing bail conditions on him. He says the Council subsequently completed a child and family assessment, which he regards as flawed, and closed its case without his input.
6. Mr X subsequently regained care of the children through private law proceedings. He says however that the Council’s actions, in disbelieving his evidence and failing to represent the children’s views, led to him and the children losing the home and their possessions.
7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because we would not be able to attribute the outcome he describes to the Council’s actions. It was the bail conditions which led to him not living in the house. Bail conditions are a matter for the court. Mr X says the Council should have given the police information which would have led them to change the bail conditions and allow him to return to the house. This is speculative, and investigation by the Ombudsman would not be able to ascertain whether this was a likely outcome.
8. Moreover, the complaint correspondence shows that the decision to give up the tenancy of the house was made by Mr X’s former partner. There is no prospect that investigation would find that Mr X lost his house and possessions because of the Council’s actions. Our intervention is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is no prospect that investigation by the Ombudsman would find that the Council’s actions caused him the injustice he claims.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman