Central Bedfordshire Council (18 009 716)

Statement Upheld Child protection 17-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsmen consider Great Ormond Street Hospital (GOSH) did not withhold evidence from a child protection conference. Rather, Central Bedfordshire Council (the Council) did not share GOSH’s evidence at that conference. Also, the Council did not share the social worker’s report with Mr G before the conference in line with the safeguarding policy, which caused him frustration. The Ombudsmen consider GOSH clearly communicated its safeguarding concerns to Mr G and did not misrepresent his son’s feeding tubes coming out.

Kent County Council (19 011 279)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 17-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms J’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with her family, because it would have been reasonable of her to raise this in court during proceedings about where her child should live.

Surrey County Council (19 011 648)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 17-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr J’s complaint about the Council’s assessment of the risk he presents to his grandchildren, and the arrangements recommended to reduce this risk, because this was considered in court.

Bournemouth Borough Council (18 018 634)

Statement Upheld Child protection 16-Dec-2019

Summary: Mrs X complained about how the Council dealt with a parenting assessment and psychological assessment to inform a decision about returning her children to her care. There was no fault in the way the parenting assessment was carried out. There was delay in carrying out the psychological assessment which caused frustration and anxiety and delay in returning the children to Mrs X. The Council has agreed a suitable remedy.

Derbyshire County Council (19 003 600)

Statement Upheld Child protection 16-Dec-2019

Summary: Mr X complains the Council took too long to tell him a safeguarding investigation had ended with no action due, and sent letters to the wrong address, preventing him from pursuing contact with his child for longer than needed. There is no evidence the Council sent letters to the wrong address, but it took three and a half months before it told Mr X verbally the safeguarding investigation had ended. It will apologise and pay Mr X £250.

Central Bedfordshire Council (19 005 539)

Statement Upheld Child protection 16-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr F’s complaint about the contents of a report. It was written for court and is therefore outside his jurisdiction. We would advise Mr F to send his complaint about the Council holding inaccurate information about him to the Information Commissioner.

London Borough of Redbridge (19 001 097)

Statement Not upheld Child protection 16-Dec-2019

Summary: Ms X complains about delays and unfair comments by a social worker following a disclosure by her daughter that she was sexually abused. The Council conducted a timely investigation of both disclosures and including consideration by an Initial Child Protection Conference. There is no evidence of delay in making referrals to other support services.

City of Doncaster Council (19 013 131)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 14-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s involvement with his family. This is because the complaint is late, and we cannot consider matters which have been discussed in court. It is also unlikely that we could carry out a meaningful investigation given the time that has elapsed.

Swindon Borough Council (19 011 901)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 12-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s children services actions. His complaints are inextricably linked with continuing Court proceedings.

Sheffield City Council (19 011 948)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 12-Dec-2019

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about a social worker’s behaviour at a child protection conference. Social Work England is better placed to consider their professionalism.