Summary: Mr B complained about historical allegations made about him in 2017 which the Council investigated under its safeguarding procedures. He said the Council did not tell him it had recorded the allegations in line with its safeguarding procedures. Mr B complains this meant that in 2019 the NHS Trust acted on the historical allegations to restrict visits to his daughter who is under the care of the Trust. Mr B’s complaint about the historical allegations is late and he could have complained to us earlier. We cannot achieve the outcome he wants. Mr B can complain to us about more recent matters once the Trust has sent him a final response.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I shall refer to as Mr B, complains about a safeguarding investigation completed by Leicester City Council (the Council) in 2017 into allegations made about him. The complainant says the Council exceeded and abused its powers given to it by the Care Act 2014 and this led to a false picture of his relationship with his adult daughter. Mr B also complains that Leicestershire Partnership NHS Trust (the Trust) acted on the allegations and unlawfully restricted his visits to his daughter. He says his right to family life has been abused.
2. To put things right Mr B would like the Ombudsmen to make the Council produce a written document to support their accusations or admit that it made mistakes. He would like the Council to apologise in writing for accusing him of physically and emotionally abusing his daughter. He would also like the Trust to answer his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsmen’s role and powers

3. The Ombudsmen have the power to jointly consider complaints about health and social care. Since April 2015, these complaints have been considered by a single team acting on behalf of both Ombudsmen. (Local Government Act 1974, section 33ZA, as amended, and Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 18ZA)
4. The Ombudsmen cannot investigate late complaints unless they decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to the Ombudsmen about something an organisation has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended, and Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 9(4).)
5. The Ombudsmen provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. They may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if they believe:

• it is unlikely they would find fault, or
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• it is unlikely they could add to any previous investigation by the bodies, or
• they cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Health Service Commissioners Act 1993, section 3(2) and Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have considered information provided by Mr B with his complaint and information provided by the Council and the Trust to the Ombudsmen. Mr B has been given an opportunity to respond to a draft of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr B’s adult daughter, Miss G, has a mental health diagnosis and is detained under section 3 of the Mental Health Act 1983.
8. The Council has worked with Miss G in the past to find her suitable supported living placements. Miss G also lived with Mr B when not in supported living accommodation. He says he has enjoyed unrestricted access to his daughter even when she was in supported living accommodation.
9. In March 2017, the Council received a safeguarding alert following an incident where Miss G was removed from Mr B’s home by the police after she had been physically aggressive. An allegation was made that Miss G had sustained some bruising because Mr B had to restrain her at the time.
10. The family agreed that Miss G should not return home and the Council agreed to find a supported living placement. Around the same time the Council received information which related to allegations about Mr B and his behaviour towards his daughter. The Council investigated the allegations under its safeguarding procedures.
11. Miss G’s mental health deteriorated while in the supported living placement. She was detained in line with the Mental Health Act 1983 in late 2017.
12. A Council Officer met with Mr B in January 2018 to discuss the safeguarding allegations. The outcome of the safeguarding investigation about concerns of sexual abuse was inconclusive.
13. In January 2018 Mr B wrote to the Council and asked it to address his complaint. He specifically complained about the safeguarding officer and the allegations made about him. Mr B said the officer’s handling of the case had defamed his good character and reputation. Mr B said he wanted a letter of apology for this and his letter inserted into the case notes.
14. The Council replied to Mr B in February and confirmed his letter, and its response would be included in Miss G’s case records. The Council confirmed the source of some of the safeguarding allegations. It did not apologise for its officer reporting the allegations to Mr B or the related safeguarding enquiry. The letter set out that Mr B had the right to contact the Ombudsman about his concerns.
15. In December 2019, Mr B raised further concerns with the Council about historical allegations made about him. He also raised a concern about the actions of the Trust and a safeguarding alert received around this time which the Trust was investigating.
16. The Council responded to Mr B and said it would take on the responsibility for investigating the safeguarding alert. It said safeguarding concerns about an incident that happened on the Trust’s ward are usually investigated by the Trust. The Council said following consultation with a principal social worker it decided it was appropriate for it to progress the investigation instead.
17. The Council’s formal complaint response dated May 2020, confirmed Mr B was aware of the safeguarding allegations made in 2017 as he was involved in a discussion with the lead officer about the allegations. The Council also said Mr B had complained about the safeguarding concerns in January 2018.
18. The Trust confirmed it was investigating a complaint from Mr B which related to its actions around a more recent safeguarding alert. Mr B has not received a final response to this complaint.

Findings

19. Mr B did not complain to the Ombudsmen after he raised concerns with the Council about the historical safeguarding investigation from March 2017. Mr B would like the Ombudsmen to consider this complaint now.
20. Mr B’s complaint to the Ombudsmen about the historical safeguarding investigation allegations made in 2017 is late because it is more than 12 months when he first became aware there was a problem.
21. Mr B said he was not aware the issues had been formalised in a section 42 safeguarding enquiry. However, whether Mr B knew about the formalisation of a section 42 enquiry is less relevant than the fact he was aware there was a problem he was unhappy about.
22. Mr B was aware of the allegations because he complained to the Council in early 2018. He could have asked us to consider a complaint at the time as the Council gave him this information in its response of February 2018.
23. The outcome of the safeguarding investigation was inconclusive and therefore not substantiated. Councils have a duty to investigate allegations which fall under safeguarding procedures. The Ombudsmen would not discourage councils from doing so. Therefore, the Ombudsmen cannot ask the Council to produce a document to support the allegations. Mr B is already aware who made the allegations and why the Council investigated the matter. The Ombudsmen could not achieve more.
24. Mr B has also complained about a more recent safeguarding investigation which started in December 2019. The Trust and the Council were both involved in the investigation. Mr B complained to the Council and the Trust.
25. The Council responded to Mr B’s complaint in May 2020 and the Trust is dealing with a related complaint. The Trust said this complaint is ongoing. Mr B can ask us to consider a new complaint about more recent matters once he receives a final response from the Trust.

Back to top

Final decision

26. The complaint by Mr B’s is late and I have now closed the complaint. Mr B can complain to us about more recent matters once he receives a final response from the Trust.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman