Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate a complaint made by Mrs Z about how the Council treated her and her family during her great granddaughters’ care proceedings. This is because Mrs Z is not a suitable person to raise some of her complaints as she has not suffered a personal injustice, and any injustice she has from some other complaints is not significant enough to warrant investigating. It would also be reasonable for the courts to consider some of her complaints and for part of the complaint to be put to the Information Commissioner’s Office.

The complaint

1. Mrs Z has complained about how the Council dealt with her family when deciding what should happen to her great-granddaughters A and B. Mrs Z says
• The family has had three different social workers who have been providing them with conflicting information. Mrs Z has also complained a social worker showed lack of empathy and her reports had many inaccuracies.
• The Council has failed to provide effective lines of communication with the family and has failed to respond on many occasions.
• The Council misrepresented a text message that A and B’s great aunt sent to a social worker.
• A and B were placed in care without the panel or the guardian’s agreement. Moreover, A and B’s father was not informed of the decision to move them. The Council also failed to obtain the parents’ signatures for a Section 20 notice before they were put into care.
• The Council allowed A and B’s father unsupervised access but then later decided otherwise when A and B were seen at a local park with him.
• The Council failed to provide A and B’s grandmother with financial support despite the family looking after them for three years.
• The Council invited A and B’s father to attend a hospital appointment but gave him the incorrect time. As a result, he arrived after the appointment had been done. Mrs Z has also said the Council gave A and B’s parents the wrong postcode for a meeting.
• The Council failed to provide her daughter with financial help for the three years she was looking after A and B.
2. Mrs Z has also complained about how the Council treated her personally. She has said:
• On one night when Mrs Z was looking after A and B, the Council only sent her a letter authorising her to look after the children after 6pm. This was after her friend who had helped her look after the children the previous night had gone home. As a result, Mrs Z had no one to support her to look after the children.
• The Council refused a request for the assessments to be done by an independent social worker. As a result, the social worker failed Mrs Z on the assessments as she knew it would happen
• The Council sent Mrs Z’s assessment to A and B’s mother who knew before she did that, she had failed the assessment.
3. Mrs Z also says the Council have been sending A and B for contact with their parents in a taxi without an escort.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

4. 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
• the fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• the injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants, or

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

5. 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)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A (6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. As part of this assessment I have

• considered the complaint made by Mrs Z and the final response from the Council; and
• issued a draft decision and invited Mrs Z to reply.

Back to top

What I found

8. Mrs Z complained to the Council about matters set out above. The Council responded on 19 December 2019.
9. In its response the Council stated that in normal circumstances it would not deal with the complaint in any detail because Mrs Z did not have parental responsibility. However, in this instance it decided it would respond since Ms Z had stated she had assisted the children’s grandmother for three years and the children had recently been left in her sole care.
10. In its response the Council acknowledged that Mrs Z didn’t agree with any of the assessments. However, it stated that Mrs Z would have the opportunity to address any errors at a future court hearing.
11. The Council also stated that the children’s mother had given consent for A and B to be put into care.
12. Although Mrs Z has now brought the complaint about how the Council treated her family to the ombudsman, we cannot consider it. This is because she does not have parental responsibility for A and B, so we would not consider her a suitable person to raise the concerns she has.
13. Moreover, the complaints Mrs Z has made about how the Council treated her family members means they, not Mrs Z, would have suffered any injustice.
14. Mrs Z has also complained about the Council’s delay in providing a letter allowing her to look after A and B overnight on 25 August 2019. She says the delay meant her friend couldn’t stay overnight to help her.
15. The Ombudsman will not investigate this part of the complaint because the injustice suffered by Mrs Z regarding this is not significant enough to justify our involvement.
16. A and B were taken into care on the order of the court and if Mrs Z was concerned about the content of the assessment which formed part of the Council’s evidence this would need to be challenged at court. Both the Council and Mrs Z have indicated there is a court hearing due soon to decide whether A and B will be adopted. If Mrs Z believes the assessment is inaccurate, and that A and B should be returned to her or daughter she would need to argue this at court.
17. It would also be reasonable for Mrs Z to take her complaint about the Council sending the results of her assessment to A and B’s mother to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). This is because this is a data protection issue and the ICO have specific powers to deal with such complaints

Back to top

Final decision

18. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mrs Z is not a suitable person to bring certain complaints as she has not suffered a personal injustice, and any injustice she has suffered from some complaints is not significant enough to warrant investigating. It would also be reasonable for the courts and the ICO to consider her other complaints.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman