Child protection archive 2020-2021


Archive has 347 results

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (20 001 218)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 04-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr X complained the Council failed to safeguard and protect his two children between November 2018 and May 2020. The Council upheld all of Mr X’s complaints under the statutory children’s complaints procedure and made recommendations. The Council then acted with further fault when it again failed to correctly consider whether to initiate care proceedings. The Council agreed to pay Mr X £750 to recognise the significant distress, frustration and uncertainty this caused him. It also agreed to provide the Ombudsman with evidence it has carried out the service improvement recommendations made during the statutory children’s complaints procedure.

  • Leicestershire County Council (20 007 417)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 04-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the information the Council holds about him. The Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed, it is unlikely we could achieve more than the Council’s offer to place his views on its file and he has not been caused a significant injustice by not knowing the information for three years.

  • Stoke-on-Trent City Council (20 009 756)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 04-Feb-2021

    Summary: We cannot investigate Mr B’s complaint that the Council was at fault in its involvement with him and his daughter. This is because the complaint concerns matters which have been considered in court.

  • Southampton City Council (20 001 713)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 03-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaints about a Council children services assessment. He does not have parental responsibility for the children involved. And the Information Commissioner’s Office is better placed to consider his data protection dispute.

  • London Borough of Hillingdon (20 009 385)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 03-Feb-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about information sharing and an officer’s professionalism because there are other bodies better placed. We cannot consider whether the Council should take any safeguarding action because a Court is considering this.

  • Salford City Council (20 002 458)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 02-Feb-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains about the Council’s management of his contact with his daughter. The Council is at fault and has caused injustice to Mr X. The Council has agreed to an apology and financial remedy.

  • London Borough of Redbridge (20 009 303)

    Statement Closed after initial enquiries Child protection 28-Jan-2021

    Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about child protection action taken by the Council. We have already decided a complaint by Ms X about this matter. The remaining points of complaint considered by the Council since our decision are not substantively different and do not warrant investigation.

  • London Borough of Haringey (20 001 417)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 26-Jan-2021

    Summary: Mr B complained about how the Council dealt with a child protection referral concerning his family. We have found no fault by the Council in this substantive matter. However, there was fault in the Council’s handling of Mr B’s complaint, for which a remedy has been agreed.

  • Torbay Council (20 003 002)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 25-Jan-2021

    Summary: Mrs B complained about the action taken by the Council in respect of her children when they were in foster care. We cannot find any fault with Council’s actions.

  • Kingston Upon Hull City Council (20 003 097)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 25-Jan-2021

    Summary: The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for providing misinformation and wrongly telling Miss Y to tell her employer of her involvement with children’s social care, causing her to lose her job. The Ombudsman also finds fault with the Council for failing to remedy the injustice caused to Miss Y, resulting in further delay and distress. The Ombudsman does not find fault with the Council for placing Miss Y’s child on the child protection register. The Council has agreed to apologise to Miss Y, provide her with a financial remedy and review how it considers remedies for injustice caused by maladministration.

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings