Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the information he says a children services officer told him the Council had. It is unlikely we could achieve a significantly different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Mr X, says a Council officer told him a false version of events.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
3. We cannot investigate complaints about what happens in schools. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5, paragraph 5(b), as amended)
4. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. In this statement, I have used the word 'fault' to refer to these. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint. I refer to this as ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we believe:
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify the cost of our involvement, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information Mr X provided with his complaint and the Council’s responses which it provided. I discussed the complaint with Mr X during a telephone conversation and he provided his comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr X has an autistic child B who one day accidentally burnt themselves. B refused to go to hospital. The next day Mr X says when he took B to school he told the school. Mr X says he, and the school’s deputy head, took B to the local NHS walk in clinic to be checked and for treatment.
7. Later Mr X says a Council social worker telephoned him. He says during the call the officer said Mr X had not told the school about the burn and had not provided B with any pain relief. Mr X says he felt like he was being blamed and said the officer warned him a repeat could end in child protection action. Mr X felt threatened by this.
8. The reply to Mr X’s complaint the Council said:
• It got some information from the school;
• Its records do not show the comments Mr X says were made;
• The telephone conversation cannot be investigated as it was uncorroborated and,
• Mr X is entitled to seek a copy of the records if he wishes to check the accuracy.

Analysis

9. It is unlikely our investigation will achieve significantly more than the Council has offered in reply to Mr X’s complaint.
10. We cannot investigate the information the school gave the Council.
11. There is little practical prospect of being able to robustly investigate the telephone conversation.
12. Mr X has a right to get the Council’s records. If they are inaccurate it is reasonable to expect Mr X to contact the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). The is because Parliament set up the ICO to consider such issues.

Back to top

Final decision

13. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely our investigation could achieve a significantly different result.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman