Summary: Mrs X complained about the Council’s social worker having inappropriate content on their social media page which was publicly accessible. We will not investigate this complaint, because it is unlikely we could add to the Council’s investigation and achieve a more meaningful remedy. The Council ensured the content was removed. It will now also provide a sincere apology and pay the family £150 to recognise the impact the content had on them.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained about the Council’s social worker having inappropriate content on their social media page, which was publicly accessible. Mrs X says her children found the content and it caused them distress.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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 could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered the information Mrs X provided when she complained to us.
4. I contacted the Council to discuss it providing a remedy to the family, given it had acknowledged it was at fault and this had caused injustice.
5. I considered Mrs X’s comments on my draft decision.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mrs X’s child found the social media profile of the family’s social worker online, some months after the worker had finished working with them. Mrs X says some of the content that was viewable publicly was inappropriate and was specific to issues that had been relevant to the family. She says this caused her children significant distress, and she complained to the Council.
7. The Council responded to Mrs X’s complaint and acknowledged there was inappropriate content on the social worker’s profile. It told Mrs X it had dealt with the issue with the worker concerned, and the posts had been removed.
8. When Mrs X complained to us, she said she wanted an apology from the Council. The Council’s response to her complaint did not consider how the issue had impacted the family and it did not apologise to Mrs X. I asked the Council, given that it had accepted there was fault, whether it could suggest an appropriate remedy to recognise the distress the family had experienced.
9. The Council has now offered to apologise and pay the family £150. I consider this is within a reasonable range of remedies we would be likely to recommend if we were to investigate this complaint, and it provides the apology Mrs X seeks. I consider it unlikely that we could add to the Council’s investigation, or that further investigation by the Ombudsman would lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because the Council has now offered an appropriate remedy to recognise the impact on the family.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman