Summary: Mr W and Ms X complained the Council failed to properly investigate safeguarding concerns they raised about Mr W’s child Y. Ms X said this left her and Mr W feeling the Council did not take their concerns seriously. There was no fault in the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mr W and Ms X complained they provided the Council with information showing Mr W’s ex-partner Ms J was in contact with Ms X’s ex-partner Mr E, who has a history of violent behaviour and should not be around children. They said the Council failed to investigate the impact of this on Mr W’s child Y and other concerns they raised about Y’s living conditions.
2. Mr W and Ms X said this left them feeling the Council did not take their concerns for Y’s safety seriously.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. We investigate complaints of injustice caused by ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’. I have used the word ‘fault’ to refer to these. 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 discussed her view of the complaint.
6. I made enquiries of the Council and considered the information it provided. This included emails between the complainants and the Council, screenshots provided by Ms X and Ms X’s complaint form.
7. I wrote to Ms X and the Council with the draft decision. I considered Ms X’s comments before I made the final decision.

Back to top

What I found

Law

8. Councils have a duty to make enquiries where a child is suffering or likely to suffer significant harm. The enquiries must establish the child’s situation and determine whether protective action is required (S.47 Children Act 1989).
9. Anyone with concerns about a child’s welfare can make a referral to a local authority.
10. The Council may decide after information gathering to assess whether the child is at risk by:
• carrying out a more detailed assessment of the child’s needs
• holding a strategy meeting
11. A social worker should see the child as soon as possible if the decision is that the referral requires further assessment.

Section 47 enquiry

12. Where information gathered during a referral or an assessment results in the social worker suspecting the child is suffering or likely to suffer harm, a Section 47 enquiry is initiated.
13. A Section 47 enquiry is initiated to decide whether and what type of action is required to safeguard and promote the welfare of the child in question.
14. A Section 47 enquiry must be led by a social worker who will be responsible for consulting with agencies involved with the child and family for example GP, schools and nurseries.
15. The Section 47 enquiry may conclude the original concerns:
• were not substantiated
• were not substantiated but consideration should be given to whether the child may need additional help or services
• substantiated and the child is suffering or likely to suffer. An initial Child Protection Conference should be held at this point.

What happened

Background

16. Ms X’s partner Mr W shares a young child, Y with his ex-partner Ms J. Ms X’s ex-partner Mr E has been ordered by the courts not to have any contact with Ms X or her children.
17. In April 2019 the police contacted the Council because of concerns Y was living in an unsafe environment. At this time, Mr W also expressed concerns that Y’s living environment was unsuitable. The Council contacted Ms J and she told them she was addressing the issues raised. The Council did not find Y was at risk of harm and did not take further action.
18. In the following months, Mr W and Ms X raised further concerns about Y’s wellbeing and safety. The Council spoke to Ms J again and decided not to investigate further as it was satisfied with her answers. The Council told Mr W to pursue his concerns with the court.

The complaint

19. In February 2020, the Council received an anonymous referral stating Ms J was socialising with Mr E. Mr W also separately told the Council he was worried Ms J was not properly caring for Y. The Council launched a Section 47 enquiry and made announced and unannounced visits to Ms J’s home. Ms J told the social worker she only had short term contact with Mr E. The social worker found Ms J’s house clean and did not identify any safeguarding concerns for Y, so the Council decided not to take further action.
20. In August 2020 Mrs X told the Council Ms J was still in contact with Mr E and was also socialising with other people the Council had told her to stop contacting for safeguarding reasons. She provided screenshots from Ms J’s social media in support of her statements. In September 2020, Mr W reiterated this information to the Council.
21. The Council decided not to take further action because it was satisfied with its previous investigation and felt parental conflict between Ms J and Mr W was at the heart of the matter.
22. Mrs X contacted the Council again on 30 October 2020 because she felt the Council disregarded the information she provided. Mrs X further complained Y was living in a property with uncovered concrete flooring, and she felt this was unsafe.
23. The Council spoke with Ms J and she informed the Council she was unemployed and struggling to buy carpets for her home but was sourcing rugs to place in Y’s bedroom.
24. On 11 November 2020 the Council wrote to Ms X and told her it could not investigate the complaint because this could influence ongoing court proceedings between Mr W and Ms J. The Council told Ms X to pursue the matter through the legal process if she remained concerned for Y’s wellbeing.
25. On 29 March 2021 Ms X told the Council Ms J had posted a photograph of her and another person who was not supposed to be around Y on her social media. She also said a friend told her Ms J invited this person into her home.
26. The Council’s social worker contacted Ms J and she advised the friend was not a danger to Y and had not spent any significant time with her. Following this, Mr W and Ms X contacted the Council to advise Ms J had been in the company of this person again and was exhibiting erratic behaviour. The Council has confirmed police checks were carried out in relation to this incident and there was no evidence Y had been caused harm.
27. Ms X brought the complaint to the Ombudsman as she was unhappy with the Council’s responses. She said the Council had notified Ms J whenever a visit was due to take place, and therefore it had not uncovered any evidence of harm to Y.
28. In response to our enquiries the Council maintained it has investigated all concerns brought to its attention in relation to Y.

Findings

29. The crux of Mr W and Ms X’s complaint is their belief the Council has not sufficiently investigated the concerns they have raised. The Council is required by law to consider and investigate upon receipt of information indicating a child is suffering or likely to suffer harm. The evidence seen so far shows in response to Mr W and Ms X’s complaints, the Council has launched a section 47 enquiry, interviewed and made announced and unannounced visits to Ms J and it was satisfied Y is not at risk. The police have also investigated the situation and have not found it necessary to take further action. The Ombudsman cannot question the merits of a decision the Council has properly made. There is no evidence the Council has acted with fault in its decision making.

Back to top

Final decision

30. There was no fault with the Council’s response to Mr W and Ms X’s complaints. I have completed the investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman