Suffolk County Council (20 005 558)

Category : Children's care services > Child protection

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 02 Dec 2020

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how a Council responded to his safeguarding referral because he does not have parental responsibility for the children concerned.

The complaint

  1. The complainant, whom I shall refer to as Mr X, says the Council has failed to take action in response to his grandchildren’s safeguarding referral and has failed to provide him with information.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)
  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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)
  3. We may investigate complaints made on behalf of someone else if they have given their consent. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26A(1), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered the information Mr X provided with his complaint and the Council’s reply to him which it provided. I considered Mr X’s comments on a draft version of this decision.

Back to top

What I found

  1. Mr X says he contacted the NSPCC about his concerns for his grandchildren’s care. They live with their mother, Mr X’s daughter, and her partner. Mr X says he knows the NSPCC referred the case to the Council. Mr X contacted the Council to find out what had happened and to encourage it to take action.
  2. The Council says its children services team explored his concerns and made relevant checks. It says the case did not meet its threshold for safeguarding action. It says the mother, Mr X’s daughter, has been encouraged to contact the Council should she have any concerns.
  3. Mr X says he wants more information about what actually the Council did and why it has not taken more action. He says he does not believe the Council took the action it should have or the officers involved knew what was really happening. He says the Council has shown a poor attitude towards him and a lack of care.
  4. The Council says he is not entitled to any further information because he does not have parental responsibility for the children involved.

Analysis

  1. Normally we need the consent of a person with parental responsibility of the children involved, or someone who is the children’s carer, to investigate complaints about children services involvement in those children’s lives. I have no good reasons this should not apply to this case.
  2. It is unlikely we could criticise the Council for not providing Mr X with more information as it is not clear that he is entitled to it. The Data Protection Act gives him the power to ask the Council to provide all the information he is entitled to. This is called a subject access request. If the Council does not provide the information which Mr X thinks it should, he can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). They are the more suitable body to decide if the Council has provided all the information Mr X is entitled to.
  3. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, including the way the Council replied to Mr X’s complaint, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. The Ombudsman will not investigate this complaint. This is because Mr X does not have parental responsibility for the children involved and the ICO is better placed to consider whether Mr X has been provided with all the information he is entitled to.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page

LGO logogram

Review your privacy settings

Required cookies

These cookies enable the website to function properly. You can only disable these by changing your browser preferences, but this will affect how the website performs.

View required cookies

Analytical cookies

Google Analytics cookies help us improve the performance of the website by understanding how visitors use the site.
We recommend you set these 'ON'.

View analytical cookies

In using Google Analytics, we do not collect or store personal information that could identify you (for example your name or address). We do not allow Google to use or share our analytics data. Google has developed a tool to help you opt out of Google Analytics cookies.

Privacy settings