Wiltshire Council (19 009 174)

Statement Not upheld Child protection 18-Mar-2020

Summary: There is no fault by Wiltshire Council in relation to this complaint about the content of a child protection plan put in place as a result of a decision reached at a child protection case conference

Stoke-on-Trent City Council (19 017 761)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 18-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about whether the Council holds inaccurate information about her. It is reasonable to expect Ms X to tell a Court if she thinks the information affects its decision. And the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to decide if the information needs changing.

Buckinghamshire County Council (19 007 634)

Statement Upheld Child protection 17-Mar-2020

Summary: Ms X complains about the Council’s involvement in her family over child protection matters. The Ombudsman finds fault with how the Council communicated and provided support to Ms X. We have recommended the Council makes financial payment to Ms X.

Durham County Council (19 018 956)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 17-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate a complaint made by Mrs Z about how the Council treated her and her family during her great granddaughters’ care proceedings. This is because Mrs Z is not a suitable person to raise some of her complaints as she has not suffered a personal injustice, and any injustice she has from some other complaints is not significant enough to warrant investigating. It would also be reasonable for the courts to consider some of her complaints and for part of the complaint to be put to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

Essex County Council (19 017 628)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 16-Mar-2020

Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s social worker having inappropriate content on their social media page which was publicly accessible. We will not investigate this complaint, because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation and achieve a more meaningful remedy. The Council ensured the content was removed. It will now also provide a sincere apology and pay the family £150 to recognise the impact the content had on them.

Durham County Council (19 018 816)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 14-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint that council officers lied during court proceedings and in reports written for the Court. This is because we have no powers to consider matters which could have reasonably been raised in court, and we cannot consider complaints about decisions taken in court.

Devon County Council (19 005 044)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 13-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman cannot investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because most of the matters complained of have relate to decisions taken in a court and are out of our jurisdiction. There is no fault in the Council’s actions regarding other issues.

Surrey County Council (19 015 160)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 13-Mar-2020

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the way in which the Council managed safeguarding referrals made by the complainant. This is because there is no evidence of fault in the Council’s actions.

Southampton City Council (19 017 384)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Other 13-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complained the courts made an unlawful restraining order based on the Council’s advice, when the Council should instead have started care proceedings. We will not investigate this complaint, as all issues Mr X complains about were considered in court or inextricably linked to the court proceedings.

Gloucestershire County Council (19 018 401)

Statement Closed after initial enquiries Friends and family carers 13-Mar-2020

Summary: Mr X complained the Council removed a foster child from his care in 2016 based on inaccurate information, and later repeated that information. We will not investigate this late complaint. This is because Mr X could reasonably have complained sooner, and in any event the Information Commissioner’s Office is best placed to consider his complaint.