Summary: Ms V says the Council failed to act appropriately to stop her children having contact with their father, who was a domestic violence perpetrator. She said this caused her, and the children, a great deal of distress. There is no evidence of Council fault.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms V, complained the Council had failed, in 2016, to work effectively with other agencies, including her local council (in Wales), in the best interests of her children. As a result, she continued to allow contact between her children and their father, exposing them to emotional harm and causing immense distress.
2. I was also asked to consider the Council’s complaints handling.
3. I will refer to this Council as ‘The Council’ and the council where Ms V lives as ‘Council 2’. Council 2 is not in our jurisdiction.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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) In this case, I am exercising discretion to consider the complaint as Ms V would not have known what happened before she made a subject access request.
5. 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)
6. 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 our involvement (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), 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 spoke to Ms V on the telephone and considered the information she provided with her complaint. I also made enquiries of the Council and assessed its response. I refer to relevant statutory guidance in my draft decision. I have consulted with the Public Services Ombudsman for Wales (PSOW) on this complaint given Council 2 is based there. I sent Ms V and the Council a copy of my draft decision and took any comments they made into account before reaching a decision.

Back to top

What I found

Background

9. Ms V lives in Wales with her children after leaving her ex-husband (Mr W) who was abusive towards her. At the time of the matters complained of, she was driving the children to contact with him every couple of weeks and allowing him to have longer contacts at times through school holidays. Ms V told me Mr W was having contact with the children for the equivalent of around four weeks every year. This was a private arrangement and the Council was not involved.
10. Ms V has now taken legal action against Mr W and the children no longer have contact. She considers that if she had been better informed, she could and would have stopped contact much earlier.

What happened

11. The Council’s Safeguarding Referral Team sent a referral to Council 2 in March 2016 saying there was evidence of “domestic violence and abuse” and that children might be involved. This is because an incident had been referred to the Multi Agency Risk Assessment Conference (MARAC), which is a group that councils sit on alongside the police to discuss the risk from domestic violence. The referral itself did not make that explicit.
12. Council 2 told the Council; “until we receive confirmation of the concerns you have in relation to (Mr W) we will not be taking any further action. Please could you provide this information if there are concerns in relation to him having contact with the children”. However, Council 2 then telephoned Ms V leading her to follow this up with the Council to try to get more information.
13. The Council’s record of that telephone call says the officer explained; “There are concerns in relation to (Mr W) and domestic violence and this leads to concern that the children will be exposed to this when they visit his address. (Ms V) said she does not know what to do. I advised (her) to contact police (in the Council’s area, and) that the matter had been referred to (Council 2) as the children live in that area and she needs to contact them for further advice/support in relation to what to do next”.
14. The Council also responded to Council 2 acknowledging Ms V was “very worried” by Council 2’s call to her. Its email asked Council 2 to refer to the police for the MARAC minutes and for details that led to the incident being discussed at MARAC. It highlighted significant concerns and said it “advised (Ms V) that I have referred the matter to yourselves as the children are living in your area and also advised her to call the police if she wants to obtain further information regarding the incident”.
15. Through my enquiries it was established that an earlier referral was made to Council 2 because of a meeting of the Multi-Agency Safeguarding Hub (MASH) at which Mr W was discussed. This happened too long ago for me to investigate robustly.
16. No further action was taken. Ms V continued to allow contact.

What should have happened

17. Section 47 of the Children Act 1989 explains there is a duty to make enquiries if a Council has “reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives, or is found, in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm”. It goes on to say; “Where a local authority are making enquiries under this section with respect to a child who appears to them to be ordinarily resident within the area of another authority, they shall consult that other authority, who may undertake the necessary enquiries in their place”.
18. The Council is clear that it did not know whether Ms V’s children were “suffering, or (were) likely to suffer, significant harm” because it did not know how much (if any) contact the children were having with Mr W. It needed Council 2 to establish this. It gave Council 2 the details of what had happened i.e. that Mr W had been discussed at MARAC and the police could be approached for further information. There is no evidence of fault. The Council does not own MARAC minutes and is not able to distribute them. It was not unreasonable for it to think Council 2 could get a copy and/or ask the police for more detail.
19. It also says it told Ms V; “There are concerns in relation to (Mr W) and domestic violence and this leads to concern that the children will be exposed to this when they visit his address”. Ms V says she contacted Mr W who denied violence. She concluded it was, as he explained, a ‘petty argument which was classed as domestic abuse for the purpose of reporting’ but this would not explain why the Council, and the police, thought it was so significant that Council 2 needed to be made aware of what happened.
20. The Council accepted it might have told Ms V a little more when she telephoned. It could have said; ‘if we received this referral, we would have concerns about you maintaining contact between Mr W and the children’. This was still, however, a matter for Council 2 to establish. I cannot know, even if the Council had said this, whether the information would have been sufficient for Ms V to end contact given Mr W would have strongly denied any wrongdoing. I am not finding it at fault.
21. If referrals are considered incomplete, it is open to the receiving council to conduct a strategy meeting (in line with ‘Working Together to Safeguard Children’, which is the relevant statutory guidance) in order to gather more detail from all parties involved. I am not finding the Council at fault for providing incomplete evidence to Council 2.

Complaints handling

22. Ms V said the Council had failed to properly address her complaints. I have not found the Council at fault in the substantive matters. Because of this, I consider it would be inappropriate for me to look at its complaints handling.

Back to top

Final decision

23. There is no evidence of Council fault.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman