Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s response to safeguarding concerns. This is because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify our investigation.

The complaint

1. Mrs X says the Council has not responded to her safeguarding concerns about a relative.
2. Mrs X says this has caused her extreme anxiety, especially as she has been deprived of any contact with or information about her relative.
3. She would like to know whether the Council properly applied its safeguarding duties. She would also like to know why she was prevented from having contact with her relative and for contact to be reinstated.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or continue an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Our role is not to ask whether an organisation could have done things better, or whether we agree or disagree with what it did. Instead, we look at whether there was fault in how it made its decisions. If we decide there was no fault in how it did so, we cannot ask whether it should have made a particular decision or say it should have reached a different outcome.
9. The Council told the Ombudsman how it considered Mrs X’s concerns, how it evaluated her relative’s safeguarding and how it supported Mrs X and her relative. I consider it properly followed safeguarding procedures.
10. The Council was entitled to use its professional judgement to decide what safeguarding measures should be put in place, and the Ombudsman cannot question this decision unless it was tainted by fault. As the Council properly considered Mrs X’s relatives safeguarding, I consider it unlikely that we would find fault.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman