Summary: There is no evidence of fault in how the Council dealt with concerns Mr C raised regarding his son’s wellbeing.

The complaint

1. Mr C complains about the Council’s handling of concerns he raised about the wellbeing of his son, who lives with Mr C’s ex-partner. I shall refer to Mr C’s son as D and his ex-partner as Ms Z. Mr C says the Council:
• Delayed starting its investigation.
• Did not properly consider Ms Z’s mental health issues.
• Included inaccurate information about his son’s health.
2. Mr C also complains about the level of contact he has with D.

Back to top

What I have investigated

3. I have investigated how the Council handled Mr C’s concerns about his son’s wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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)
5. 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)
6. 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)
7. 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

8. I communicated with Mr C and considered the information he provided.
9. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
10. I also sent a draft version of this decision to both parties and invited their comments.

Back to top

What I found

Child protection referrals

11. Anyone who is concerned that a child is suffering or at risk of suffering harm should inform the Council. If the Council has reasonable cause to suspect the child id suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm it must make enquiries to decide whether to take action to protect the child or promote his or her welfare. (Children Act 1974, section 47(1))
12. The government has issued guidance to Councils managing cases where concerns are raised about a child’s safety or welfare. (Working Together to Safeguard Children)
13. The Council should make initial enquiries of agencies involved with the child and family. These agencies may include nurseries, schools and GPs. The information gathered at this stage will enable the council to assess the nature and level of any harm the child may be facing. The assessment may result in:
• No further action.
• A decision to carry out a more detailed assessment of the child’s needs.
• A decision to convene a strategy meeting.
14. When the Council considers a more detailed assessment is needed, it uses the Child and Family Assessment system to comply with the national Working Together to Safeguard Children 2013 guidance.
15. Under the Council system, where the Council’s children’s social work service is contacted about a family, a social worker must make complete the Child and Family Assessment within 45 working days of the initial referral.

What happened

16. Mr C has a son, D, who lives with Mr C’s ex-partner, Ms Z. At birth, D was at risk of HIV so has undergone tests and was prescribed a course of antiviral drugs.
17. On 6 September 2018, Mr C contacted the Council and raised concerns about D’s wellbeing. Mr C said:
• Ms Z was allowing her dogs to lick D’s face, which could put him at risk of infection.
• Ms Z was allowing D to sleep in her bed, when she had previously almost sat on him.
• Ms Z had previously attempted suicide and Mr C was worried she may have post-natal depression.
18. Records show the Council made the decision to treat Mr C’s concerns as a referral, the Children’s Social Work Team (CSWT) proceeded to make initial enquiries.
19. On 10 September, the CSWT contacted D’s health visitor, who was asked to provide information relevant to the referral. This information was provided the following day.
20. The Council also contacted Ms Z. During this meeting, Ms Z made allegations about Mr C’s treatment of D.
21. Upon completing its initial enquiries, the Council made the decision that it needed to carry out a Child & Family Assessment (C&FA).
22. A Social Worker was allocated to the case, who carried out two home visits with Ms Z and D, had a meeting with Mr C and spoke to him again on the phone.
23. The Social Worker also made enquiries with D’s GP, who provided a written statement about D’s health and copies of his medical notes. Ms Z’s health visitor was also contacted, who provided information about Ms Z’s mental health.
24. The C&FA contained details of D’s physical health. It said tests were carried out at birth, which showed he was negative for HIV. He has since received medication included antiviral drugs, and while he was showing as negative for the infection, he was still at risk.
25. The C&FA also contained details of Ms Z’s mental health. It said that Ms Z denied the allegations in Mr C’s referral. It went on to say Ms Z had undergone a screening for post-natal depression, which had highlighted no issues and that her health visitor had no concerns about Ms Z, and how she cared for D.
26. The Social Worker concluded that the allegations Mr C raised in his referral had not been substantiated and made the decision that the case would be closed without any further action. The C&FA was completed on 8 November. 45 working days after the Council received MR C’s referral.

Analysis

27. Mr C complains that the Council delayed starting its investigation and included inaccurate information, including details about the health of his son and the mental health of his mother. Mr C says the case should not have been closed.
28. The Council made enquiries within days of Mr C’s referral. It concluded, within five days of receiving the referral, that a more detailed assessment of D’s needs should be carried out, in the form of a C&FA.
29. It is not for the Ombudsman to question decisions made without fault, and I do not find fault in how the Council reached its decision to carry out a C&FA, or the amount of time it took to do so.
30. Mr C said the Council inaccurately recorded that D was clear of HIV, when this could not be determined until D was 2 years old. I do not agree that the Council came to this conclusion. It recorded that recent HIV tests had been negative, but D remained at risk.
31. Having reviewed documents from D’s GP, and case note records from Mrs Z, I am satisfied that the Council properly considered D’s health when making its assessment and that it recorded information it received accurately. For these reasons I do not find fault with this element of Mr C’s complaint.
32. Mr C complained that the Council failed to properly consider Ms Z’s mental health. I am unable to disclose details of documents that I have reviewed during my investigation, because they contain information personal to Ms Z.
33. However, I can reassure Mr C that what the Council included in its C&FA is an accurate reflection of information Ms Z’s health visitor provided. I am therefore unable to find fault in how the Council considered this element of Mr C’s complaint.
34. Mr C says that the Council should have taken a different approach in response to his referrals and should not have closed the case. However, during the assessment the Council considered information that it gathered from a range of agencies before making its decision that the allegations were unsubstantiated and that the case should be closed.
35. I cannot say that the Council is at fault when making its decisions, it is a matter of professional judgement and I am satisfied that the Council fully considered Mr C’s referrals.

Back to top

Final decision

36. I have concluded my investigation on the basis that there was no fault in how the Council dealt with Mr C’s concerns.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

37. I did not investigate Mr C’s complaint about the level of contact he has with his son. This is because matter has been before the courts.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman