Privacy settings

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.

London Borough of Bromley (20 005 816)

Category : Children's care services > Child protection

Decision : Closed after initial enquiries

Decision date : 08 Sep 2021

The Ombudsman's final decision:

Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the accuracy of Council records and the decision to issue a child protection plan. The complaint is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

The complaint

  1. Mr X said the Council failed to show his family unredacted records concerning its decision in late 2018 to make his child subject to a child protection plan. He said the Council based its original decision on inaccurate information and breached procedures in several ways.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

  1. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

  1. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
  2. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

  1. Although Mr X complained the Council has not sent the family unredacted records so it can check them for errors, his complaint clearly concerns the Council’s original decision, taken in December 2018. The complaint about the accuracy of its records is not separable from that.
  2. A person may be unaware of a matter within 12 months of it happening, or s/he may be unable to complain about it promptly. In such circumstances, we often exercise discretion as it would be unreasonable to expect the person to have complained sooner.
  3. Mr X was aware of the Council’s decision immediately in December 2018. He has disputed the Council’s decision and the accuracy of its records since then. He first contacted us at the start of October 2020. It would have been reasonable for him to approach us within 12 months.

Back to top

Final decision

  1. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because it is late and there is no good reason to exercise discretion to investigate it now.

Investigator’s decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman

Print this page