Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr B’s complaints about the Council’s actions regarding his son, Mr C. This is because it is unlikely he would find enough evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about the way he and his son have been treated by the Council. Mr B says the Council did not follow process when undertaking a Best Interests Meeting about Mr C, does not respond to his concerns, says the member of staff who assaulted Mr C should not be allowed to meetings and says he wants to see Mr C more than he currently does.

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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants

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

3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered the information and documentation Mr B and the Council provided. I sent Mr B a copy of my draft decision and discussed his comments on it with him.

Back to top

What I found

5. Mr B says the Council failed to minute his concerns in a Best Interests Meeting held in July 2019. These included his concerns about the Picture Exchange Communication System (PECS) he wants Mr C to have access to, and concerns he had about a member of staff attending the meetings he alleged had assaulted Mr C in 2009.
6. The Council responded to Mr B in October 2019. It advised Mr B the Speech and Language Therapist (SALT) advised given Mr C’s cognitive ability, he needed limited options and the books were not suitable. It said it will send him a copy of the minutes when completed. I understand Mr B has received the minutes but is unhappy they do not contain details of his concerns. Mr B can ask the Council to put a copy of his concerns on the file to lie alongside the Best Interest Meeting minutes showing the omissions and inaccuracies he is concerned about.
7. Mr B complained to the Ombudsman previously about a staff member assaulting Mr C when he was placed in foster care in 2009. This resulted in him being upset when Mr B left. The Ombudsman decided in 2012 there was no fault and will not reconsider matters already decided. In the absence of fault he could not say the staff member should not attend meetings.
8. Mr B has also raised other concerns about where Mr C’s Best Interests Meetings are held and his limited contact with Mr C. The Council has explained the Court of Protection made the decision where the meeting are to be held and the contact Mr B can have with Mr C. These are not matters the Ombudsman can consider. When a court decides matters only a court can amend them.
9. Mr B says he would like to sit down with the heads of the Council to explain how he feels. Mr B makes numerous complaints to the Council. It has now, and previously, advised him it will note correspondence it receives from him but will not respond to his letters and emails unless they are about new matters. The Ombudsman could not say this is fault.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely he would find enough evidence of fault to warrant an Ombudsman investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman