Privacy settings

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.

Child protection


Recent statements in this category are shown below:

  • West Sussex County Council (20 004 993)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 03-Aug-2021

    Summary: Mr X complains that the Council's failure to communicate with him about an investigation into his children directly affected his contact with them. The Council accepted it was at fault and had caused injustice before our intervention. Mr X says the Council's remedy is inadequate. The Council has now agreed an enhanced financial remedy.

  • Bedford Borough Council (20 013 075)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 02-Aug-2021

    Summary: We cannot investigate a complaint about the accuracy of information in the Council's records. This is because the records either form part of a court report, or reflected allegations made by other bodies which are not in our jurisdiction. The Council was at fault because it did not provide the complainant with copies of meeting minutes in a timely way, but it has already addressed this. We have therefore completed our investigation.

  • Shropshire Council (20 005 709)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 23-Jul-2021

    Summary: Ms W has made a complaint about various failings by the Council about her daughter who is a 'child in need'. The Ombudsman has found several failings by the Council in this respect. Most notably, the Council pressured Ms W into housing her daughter despite the risk of harm she posed to herself and Ms W's family. Further, the Council failed to effectively consider its legal duty to house Ms W's daughter. This caused Ms W serious distress over a prolonged time. We have therefore recommended several remedies.

  • Bath and North East Somerset Council (20 003 118)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 21-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr L complains about how the Chair of a Child Protection Conference handled a review meeting, including changing the category of harm. He also complains about how the Council dealt with his complaint about this matter. We uphold the complaint about the complaint handling. The Council has agreed to our recommendations.

  • London Borough of Barnet (20 001 059)

    Statement Not upheld Child protection 13-Jul-2021

    Summary: Ms M is unhappy with the Council's response to her complaints. Most concern private family proceedings or are too old, so the Ombudsman cannot investigate them. There was no fault in the Council's response to a safeguarding referral in February 2020.

  • Sandwell Metropolitan Borough Council (20 008 827)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 09-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr and Mrs B complained the Council carried out a flawed child protection investigation. We find the Council was at fault when it did not adequately represent Mr and Mrs B's views when it completed its assessment. It also failed to provide them with a copy of the assessment in sufficient time. The Council has agreed to my recommendations to address the injustice caused by fault.

  • Torbay Council (20 009 420)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 07-Jul-2021

    Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council recorded information and carried out assessments during a child protection investigation. We found fault with the Council. This did not cause Mr B a significant injustice.

  • Oxfordshire County Council (20 011 555)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 05-Jul-2021

    Summary: Ms X complained about the Council's handling of a safeguarding investigation and failings in its complaints handling, which caused her frustration and distress. The Council was at fault for a delay in carrying out a further review and should apologise for the injustice caused.

  • Essex County Council (20 006 853)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 28-Jun-2021

    Summary: The Council acknowledged that it had made mistakes in its assessment of Miss B's family and how the Chair handled the Child Protection Conference. It agreed to apologise and amend the assessment and Conference records, and to share the corrections with other agencies who had been given incorrect information. However, it has taken too long to do so and this has compounded Miss B's distress. The Council has properly considered whether it should end the Child Protection Plans because of these shortcomings. I have recommended the Council complete the actions it promised within one month.

  • Hertfordshire County Council (20 006 177)

    Statement Upheld Child protection 28-Jun-2021

    Summary: Mr D complained about the way the Council dealt with a safeguarding referral in respect of his children in 2017 and the way it dealt with his complaint in 2020, which caused him significant distress and uncertainty. We found the Council was at fault for not informing Mr D of the referral and misleading him that it was dealing with his complaint for over six months. We also find this caused injustice to his daughter F. The Council has agreed to pay Mr D £1600, including an amount for F.