Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s social services in relation to the complainant’s contact with his daughter. This is because there is no fault in the majority of the Council’s actions complained of. The other actions are out of the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr T, says that the Council:
• Is unreasonably denying him contact with his daughter because he refused to sign a contact behaviour agreement that he regards as unfair and untrue;
• Has refused to share data about his daughter with him;
• Has inappropriately shared his data;
• Does not respond to his communications;
• Has refused to take his complaint to stage two;
• Has not responded adequately to a complaint about an incident at court;
• Has not responded properly to his complaints about similar matters dating from 2013-4; and
• Has unfairly restricted his contact with him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
4. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
5. 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:

• it is unlikely we would find fault, 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

6. I considered the information provided by Mr T and by the Council. I have also sent Mr T a draft decision for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mr T has a daughter who does not live with him. The Council is responsible for arranging contact between Mr and his daughter.
8. Following the last contact session, the Council provided a contact behaviour agreement for Mr T to sign. It said that unless he agreed to it, no further contact sessions would be arranged.
9. Mr T was not happy with the agreement, as he felt that it was unfair, and untruthfully accused him of poor behaviour. He refused to sign the agreement, and the Council has now refused to arrange contact sessions.
10. Mr T has complained to the Council about the contact behaviour agreement, and about the way it has treated him. The Council responded at stage one of the complaints procedures, but refused to progress the complaint to stage two. Mr T has therefore brought his complaint to the Ombudsman.
11. I will not investigate the complaint, however, and I will address each of Mr T’s concerns below to explain my reasons.
12. The Council is unreasonably denying him contact with his daughter because he refused to sign a contact behaviour agreement that he regards as unfair and untrue. The Council says that Mr T’s daughter is unhappy with how the contact sessions have been going, and the contact behaviour agreement was therefore drafted to reflect her wishes. There is nothing that further investigation could add to this response.
13. The Council has refused to share data about his daughter with Mr T. The Council says that Mr T’s daughter does not want to share her data with him. There is no fault in the Council’s decision.
14. The Council has inappropriately shared his data. This complaint should be made to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is the body set up by parliament to deal with such complaints.
15. The Council does not respond to Mr T’s communications. The Council has provided a response detailing Mr T’s communications and its responses. These are proportionate and there is no fault in the level of response that the Council has been providing to Mr T.
16. The Council has refused to take his complaint to stage two of the complaints procedures. The Council considered the request to progress the complaint to stage two, but appropriately quotes the Guidelines for complaint progression. They state that the complaint should not be progressed if it is considered not to be in the best interests of the child involved. In this case, the Council says it considered progression not to be in her interests, as she has clearly stated that she does not want contact with Mr T as present. There is no fault in this approach.
17. The Council has not responded adequately to a complaint about an incident at court. This complaint relates to actions following the realisation that Mr T had been given access, in error, to an address that should have been withheld from him. This was all placed before the court, and is out of our jurisdiction.
18. The Council has not responded properly to Mr T’s complaints about similar matters dating from 2013-4. The Ombudsman is not able to look at complaints about matters known to the complainant more than 12 months previously, unless there are good reasons to exercise his discretion to do so. In this case, these matters are late, and there are no good reasons to exercise discretion to look at them now.
19. The Council has unfairly restricted Mr T’s contact with it. The Council has restricted Mr T to a Single Point of Contact. It provided him with its reasons for doing so, and details about how to appeal the restriction, and when it would be reviewed. In also referred him to the LGSCO. There is no fault in the Council’s use of its policy on dealing with complainants it regards as unreasonably persistent.

Back to top

Final decision

20. Subject to any comments Mr T might make, my view is that the Ombudsman should not investigate this complaint. This is because there is no fault in the actions of the Council that are within our jurisdiction.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman