Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s refusal to investigate safeguarding concerns Mr X raised. There is insufficient evidence of fault in the Council’s actions and how it came to its decision the matters were not for the safeguarding process.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council failed to safeguard him from abuse from several organisations and failed to respond properly to his complaint. He said the matter has caused him considerable distress. He wanted the matters to be investigated thoroughly.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word fault to refer to these. We consider whether there was fault in the way an organisation made its decision. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints about councils and certain other bodies. We cannot investigate the actions of bodies such as the police, the Department for Work and Pensions and their governing bodies. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 25 and 34(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X reported to the Council that he believed the actions of several other bodies constituted systemic abuse against him as a vulnerable adult. The Council responded explaining the matters Mr X raised would not fall under its safeguarding duties. It explained he should raise the matters via the alternative available processes. It offered him a care assessment and signposted him to services that could provide advice and advocacy.

7. Mr X’s concerns related to the actions of:
• another council, which is a matter we will consider under a separate case reference and would not be for the Council to investigate;
• the police, which Mr X correctly brought to the attention of the Independent Office for Police Conduct (IOPC) as the agency with the power to investigate the matter;
• the IOPC, which has a procedure for appeals should Mr X be unhappy with how it dealt with his complaint; and
• the Department for Work and Pensions (DWP), which has its own procedure for complaints.
8. There is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council. It considered Mr X’s concerns and decided they were not safeguarding matters. Where there is no fault in how the Council came to a decision, we cannot question the outcome.
   Mr X may disagree with the Council’s view, but this does not mean the Council’s actions are fault.
9. We, like the Council, cannot investigate the actions of the police, the IOPC and the DWP, and his complaints about their actions should be raised via the processes available.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council in how it came to its decision.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman