Summary: Mr X complains the Council failed to act on his concerns about his son’s care by his ex-partner, leaving the child at risk. The records show the Council met its duties under the Children Act 1989.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, complains the Council:

• Failed to properly consider two safeguarding referrals he made on 3 and 10 June 2018 that concerned his son, Z; and
• Failed to deal with his complaint about this.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. If we are satisfied with a council’s actions or proposed actions, we can complete our investigation and issue a decision statement. (Local Government Act 1974, section 30(1B) and 34H(i), as amended)
3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. Where there is no fault in the substantive matter complained of, we do not usually comment on the quality of a council’s complaint handling. However, we may choose to do so if this creates injustice or an issue we need to highlight.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I read Mr X’s complaint and considered the Council’s duties under s.47 of the Children Act 1989. I spoke to Mr X on the telephone before making written enquiries of the Council. I shared a draft of this decision with both parties for their comments. I received none.
6. As the Council response to my enquiries contains much information about third parties, I have treated it as confidential.

Back to top

What I found

7. When a person contacts a council with child social care responsibilities to report a concern about a child, it must consider if it needs to act to protect the child. The relevant issue is whether, in the Council’s opinion, the child is suffering or is likely to suffer significant harm. It must record the contact and what it does to check if there is something about which it must act. We are only able to criticise a decision taken with procedural fault, so we cannot substitute our view for the Council’s view if it has recorded the reasons for its decision. That is professional judgement. The Council has no duty to tell the person who contacts it what it has done, apart from acknowledging the referral made.

What happened, and was there fault?

8. Mr X contacted the Council on 3 and 20 June 2018 with concerns about his son, Z’s care by his ex-partner. The Council sent me copies of the records of what it did. These show it undertook proper checks before deciding Z was not at risk of significant harm. This was not fault.
9. The Council told us it declined to deal with Mr X’s complaint because of the continuing court case. Because of the nature of the complaint, and as the court could decide issues of residence and the fitness of parents, this was a reasonable response. Although this is not fault, it might, however, have been helpful if the Council had, in refusing his complaint, at least confirmed that it had considered Mr X’s concerns.

Final decision

10. I have not upheld the complaint as there was no fault by the Council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman