Summary: Miss B complaints about the Council’s handling of safeguarding referrals about her partner’s son, Child D. The Ombudsman has found no fault in the way the Council has dealt with the concerns raised about Child D’s welfare while in his mother’s care.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I have called Miss B, complains about the Council’s handling of safeguarding referrals about her partner, Mr C’s son, D. Miss B complains the Council has not taken her and Mr C’s concerns about D’s welfare while with his mother seriously. She feels the Council has failed to obtain key evidence she and Mr C have to support their concerns about D’s mother. Miss B and Mr C remain very worried about D’s welfare while he remains in his mother’s care.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), 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. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)
5. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

6. I have spoken to Miss B and considered the information she has provided in support of her and Mr C’s complaint. Mr C has given his consent for Miss B to make the complaint on his behalf.
7. I have considered the Council’s response to my enquiries, which includes some confidential information I am unable to share with Miss B and Mr C or refer to in this decision.
8. I have also considered the Council’s procedures and the statutory guidance -Working Together to Safeguard Children 2015.
9. Miss B, Mr C and the Council had an opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I received no comments from Miss B, Mr C or the Council to consider before issuing this final decision.

Back to top

What I found

10. The Children Act 1989 says councils have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need. If a local authority receives a report of concern about a child it must decide what response is required. This includes determining whether:

• the child requires immediate protection, or
• the child is in need and should be assessed under section 17 of the Act, or
• there is reasonable cause to suspect that the child is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm

What happened

11. This chronology includes key events in this case and does not cover everything that happened.
12. Mr C and his ex-partner, Ms E, share parental responsibility for their son, D, who lives with his mother and spends time every week with his father.
13. In late August 2018, the police made a safeguarding referral to the Council about Mr E’s care of D following a report from Mr C. Mr C reported concerns about drug use by Ms E and others in her home while D was in her care.
14. The Council assessed the referral and made an unannounced visit to Ms E’s home a few days later. The Council completed a Children and Families Assessment, which involved speaking to D, his half-sibling and Ms E. The Council observed no evidence of drug use in the property and found the two children showed no signs of neglect or abuse. The Council concluded its assessment of Ms E and the two children on 11 September 2018, when it decided no further action or involvement was required.
15. The Council received another safeguarding referral about D from the National Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Children (NSPCC) in late January 2019, following a report of concern to it by Mr C. Mr C reported his continued concerns about D’s welfare while with his mother. Mr C believed D’s behaviour was evidence that Ms E was not caring for him appropriately.
16. The Council made enquiries with D’s school and found it had seen no signs of neglect or abuse. The Council noted the concerns reported by the NSPCC following Mr C’s contact related largely to the same issues he had raised about D the previous year, which suggested there may be acrimony between the parents. The Council concluded its assessment as further action was not required.
17. The Council received another referral about D from Miss B in April 2019. Miss B had concerns that Ms E had neglected to provide medication to D to help treat an illness he had developed and continued to use drugs while caring for D. The Council carried out another assessment of D, which included obtaining information from his school and doctor, and an unannounced visit to Ms E’s house. The Council undertook direct work with D to check if there was evidence of any risk to him while in his mother’s care. The Council concluded its involvement following these checks.
18. Mr C made a further referral to the Council in June 2019. He continued to express concerns that Ms E was using drugs while caring for their son. The Council decided not to take further action in respect of Mr C’s referral because it noted this repeated the previous concerns he had raised which it had thoroughly investigated.
19. The Council received another referral from D’s doctor in August 2019. This was following an appointment D had attended with Mr C. The referral related to Mr C’s concerns about D using offensive language and crying. The Council assessed the referral and concluded there were no safeguarding concerns highlighted. The Council advised Mr C to seek legal advice if he considered his son was unsafe in Ms E’s care.
20. The Council received another referral following a disclosure by D about his father. The Council conducted an unannounced visit to Ms E’s home to speak to D and his mother about the matter. The Council also spoke to Mr C about D’s disclosure. The Council concluded there was insufficient evidence of harm being caused to D by Mr C and closed the case.
21. Miss B escalated her and Mr C’s complaints and concerns to the Ombudsman because they felt the Council was ignoring the safeguarding issues they had reported.

Analysis

22. The Council’s records show it has acted on each of the referrals it received about D since August 2018. It has undertaken several unannounced visits to the home D shares with his half-sibling and mother. The Council has spoken directly to D and the other child in the household as well and Ms E. There are case notes which clearly show the Council’s focus on the wellbeing of the children.
23. The information the Council has shared with me during my investigation also includes copies of the evidence Miss B and Mr C have provided in support of their concerns. This mirrors the information Miss B has shared with me. There appears no evidence the Council has ignored or not properly considered the information Miss B and Mr C have provided.
24. The Council’s focus when assessing the matters brought to it will be on the children involved. The approach the Council has taken to obtain its own evidence to assess the situation is reasonable and entirely appropriate in circumstances where there is clear acrimony between separated parents.
25. There is no doubt Miss B and Mr C have remained very concerned about D’s welfare throughout this time. I have seen nothing to suggest the Council has not taken those concerns seriously. The Council was however entitled to reach its own conclusions about whether it needed to take further action. I have seen no evidence of maladministration in the Council’s handling of these referrals which would allow me to question the decisions or the professional judgement of the social workers that have assessed the children involved in this case.
26. The Council’s suggestion that Mr C seeks independent legal advice if he continues to have concerns about his son remaining in Ms E’s care was entirely appropriate because the existing contact arrangements were made via the courts.

Back to top

Final decision

27. I have completed my investigation and found no evidence of fault by the Council.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

28. I have not investigated any concerns relating to the Council’s action during or for court proceedings as such matters fall outside the Ombudsman’s jurisdiction and should be raised directly with the court.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman