Summary: Ms X complains about the actions of children services. She says the service did not investigate the fact her son had made numerous false allegations against her. She also says the Council made comments about her to her son’s school that was untrue and passed on inaccurate information to another Council. The Ombudsman finds fault with the Council for the comments it made to her son’s school. We have made some recommendations.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the actions of children services with regards to her son. She complains:
• The service did not investigate the fact her son had made numerous false allegations against her. The service also did not provide her with support.
• A social worker made comments about her to her son’s school, in December 2019, that were untrue.
• The Council passed on inaccurate information to another council.

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’. If there has been fault which has caused an injustice, we may suggest a remedy. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26(1) and 26A(1), as amended)
3. 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. 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

5. I spoke with Ms X and considered the information she provided.
6. I made enquiries with the Council and considered the information it provided.
7. I sent a draft decision to Ms X and the Council for their comments.
8. Under our information sharing agreement, we will share this decision with the Office for Standards in Education, Children's Services and Skills (Ofsted).

Back to top

What I found

Council’s duties towards children

9. Local authorities have a duty to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area who are in need by providing services appropriate to the child’s needs (Children Act 1989, section 17)
10. Local authorities have a duty to investigate if there is reasonable cause to suspect that a child in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm. They must decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child's welfare. (Children Act 1989, section 47)
11. These duties are set out in Statutory Guidance 'Working together to safeguard children'. When a council children's social care service receives a referral about a child who may be at risk of significant harm it must decide within one working day what type of response is needed. This will include determining whether:
• the child needs immediate protection and urgent action is required;
• the child is in need, and should be assessed under section 17 of the Children Act 1989;
• there is reasonable cause to suspect that the child is suffering, or likely to suffer, significant harm, and enquiries must be made and the child assessed under section 47 of the Children Act 1989;
• any services are required by the child and family and what type of services;
• further specialist assessments are required to help the authority decide what further action to take;
• no further action is required.

What happened

12. Ms X has a son, Y. Ms X is separated from Y’s father, Mr P. Mr P lives in another council’s area, Council B. Ms X confirmed she does not currently have any contact with her son.
13. In December 2019, the Council received a referral from Y’s school. The school told the Council Y disclosed an incident with Ms X. Y said Ms X had pinned him and held him by the torso. The school reported it had not seen any injuries.
14. The Council contacted Ms X to discuss the referral. The records showed Ms X told the Council Y tended to lie and had previously reported that she hits him. The records also noted Ms X told the Council Y had meltdowns and suicidal thoughts.
15. Ms X told the Council she had agreed for Y to go stay with Mr P. Ms X also told the Council her account of what happened regarding the incident with Y.
16. The Council also spoke with Mr P about the situation and confirmed Y would be staying with him.
17. The Council noted Y had no injuries at the time of the referral and that there were conflicting accounts of what happened. The Council decided to take no further action.
18. A week later, Ms X contacted the Council to query its decision to take no further action. Ms X told the Council Mr P had emailed her stating Y had injuries to his back and stomach but that these could be from playing rugby.
19. The records showed Ms X raised concerns about Y’s behaviour, what redress there was for her, and her view that no one recognised his mental health difficulties despite her requests for support and treatment.
20. The Council spoke with Mr P and confirmed Y was still living with him.
21. Due to the new information about Y’s bruises, the Council decided to pass the case to the assessment and intervention team to consider and assess.
22. The Council’s records noted the social worker contacted Y’s school to advise it of the decision to pass the case to the assessment and intervention team. There is no record of what discussion the social worker had with the school other than to note the school’s concerns about the risk to Y.
23. The school’s record noted the social worker had raised concerns about Ms X’s “disproportionate approach to Y’s alleged mental health concerns and feels there is also an element of fabricated illness”. It also noted the social worker raised concerns about “Ms X’s disproportionate level of anger in response to the alleged incident and towards Y”.
24. The Council’s records do not show any consideration of concerns about fabricated illness or about Ms X’s approach to the incident and Y’s alleged mental health concerns.
25. The assessment and intervention team decided no further action was needed as there was no risk to Y because he was living with Mr P and this was a long-term plan for the family.
26. Ms X said Council B would not engage with her about her concerns about Y’s behaviour. She said this was because of the Council providing inaccurate information to Council B.
27. In response to my enquiries, the Council said it had not had any communication with Council B.

Analysis

Council not investigating Ms X’s concerns

28. It is for the Council to consider the information and decide whether it needs to take further action to safeguard and promote the welfare of children within their area.
29. The evidence shows the Council had noted information from Ms X where she raised concerns about Y and her view that he tended to lie and had previously made allegations against her.
30. The records also show the Council properly considered information from the school and Mr P before it decided what action to take.
31. As the Council properly considered all relevant information before making its decision, I cannot find fault with the Council for not considering Ms X’s concerns further. This is because it decided there was no role for children services as Y had moved to live with his father. This is a decision the Council was entitled to make.

Comments made to Y’s school

32. The Council’s records on the social worker’s discussion with the school is limited. The record only notes the social worker told the school the case would be considered by the assessment and intervention team and that the school had concerns about the risk to Y.
33. The school’s record of the discussion was more comprehensive. The record noted the Council commented on Ms X’s disproportionate approach to Y’s alleged mental health concerns and that there was an element of fabricated illness. It also referred to concerns about Ms X’s disproportionate level of anger in response to the alleged incident and towards Y.
34. There is no evidence the Council was considering concerns about Ms X fabricating illness. There is also no evidence of any consideration of Ms X’s actions and approach towards Y.
35. Given the lack of evidence, on balance, I do not consider that fabricating illness was a concern the Council had. If it was, I would expect the Council to investigate this matter further and to see evidence of enquiries being made around the issue. Equally, I do not consider the Council was concerned about Ms X’s disproportionate approach towards Y for the same reasons.
36. Therefore, the Council was at fault for making the comments about Ms X fabricating illness and her disproportionate approach towards Y. This is because the comments made are not supported by any evidence.
37. I consider the fault caused Ms X an injustice because the comments caused her distress.

Information passed to Council B

38. The Council said it has not passed any information on to Council B.
39. Ms X has not provided any evidence for me to consider regarding information she feels the Council gave to Council B.
40. Therefore, I do not find fault with the Council as there is no evidence it has given any information to Council B.

Agreed action

41. To remedy the injustice caused by the fault identified, the Council has agreed to complete the following:
• Apologise to Ms X for the comments made to the school regarding concerns about her fabricating illness and her disproportionate action and anger towards Y.
• Write to the school to clarify the comments made in December 2019 were not evidence based.
• Pay Ms X £100 to recognise the distress caused by the comments made.
• Remind all relevant staff about the importance of ensuring that information shared with third parties should be evidence based.
42. The Council should complete the above remedy within four weeks of the final decision.

Back to top

Final decision

43. I find fault with the Council for making the comments about Ms X fabricating illness and her disproportionate approach towards Y. I do not find fault with the Council for not investigating Ms X’s concerns further or for the information it provided to another council.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman