Summary: Mr B complained about the way the Council recorded information and carried out assessments during a child protection investigation. We found fault with the Council. This did not cause Mr B a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Mr B complains about the way the Council responded to his complaint about its child protection investigation. He complains the Council recorded and inaccurate information in its records, assessments and reports.
2. Mr B says the Council presented a biased and unbalanced view of him which portrayed him in a negative way. He says this caused him and his family distress.
3. He also complains the Council delayed responding to his complaint, did not address all his issues and was not independent.

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’. 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)
5. 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)
6. Under the information sharing agreement between the Local Government and Social Care Ombudsman and the Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted), we will share this decision with Ofsted.

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I spoke to Mr B and considered the information he provided with his complaint. I made enquiries with the Council and considered its response along with relevant law, guidance and policy.
8. Mr B and the Council had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I carefully considered all the comments I received.

Back to top

What I found

Law and guidance

9. The Children Act 1989 and statutory guidance Working Together to Safeguard Children sets out the council’s responsibilities to safeguard children.
10. The Children Act 1989 says that, “where a local authority…have reasonable cause to suspect that a child who lives, or is found, in their area is suffering, or is likely to suffer, significant harm, the authority shall make, or cause to be made, such enquiries as they consider necessary to enable them to decide whether they should take any action to safeguard or promote the child’s welfare.” (The Children Act 47(1)).
11. Working Together says:
• If a Council accepts a referral for a child under section 17 or 47 of the Children Act 1989, it must carry out a needs assessment. It is important that the impact of what is happening to a child is clearly identified and information is gathered, recorded and checked systematically, and discussed with the child and their parents/carers where appropriate.
• Every assessment should draw together relevant information gathered from the child and their family and from relevant practitioners including teachers and school staff, early years workers, health practitioners, the police and adult social care.
12. The Ombudsman cannot investigate whether social workers are meeting their professional standards of conduct. Complaints of this nature should be referred to the social workers’ professional body, Social Work England.

The Council’s complaint procedure

13. The Council has a one stage complaints procedure. A complaint is investigated by either an officer within the relevant department or by the Information Governance Team.
14. When a complaint is investigated by a senior officer within the department, the Information Compliance Team will then review the investigation and respond to the complainant.
15. It says the complaint investigation should take no longer than 20 working days. If the complaint is complex then it might be extended to 30 working days. The Council says it will tell the complainant of any extension to the deadline.

What happened

16. In 2020 there were child protection concerns about one of Mr B’s children. The Council held a strategy discussion and carried out a child protection investigation.
17. The Council decided the case did not meet the threshold for a child protection conference and closed the case in August 2020.
18. Mr B was unhappy with some of the content and accuracy of the assessments and reports. He complained to the Council in September 2020.
19. The Council investigated his complaint and responded in November 2020. It accepted some fault in its failure to:
• ensure all information was factually correct;
• include context and Mr B’s view in some assessments and reports;
• rectify records as agreed;
• include context and balance to allegations made against Mr B by his previous partner; and
• include concerns about the mothers parenting.
20. The Council apologised to Mr B and recommended the following actions:
• update the most recent assessments;
• add Mr B’s complaint to the children’s files with an alert;
• share relevant learning from the complaint; and
• raise any practice issues in formal supervision.
21. Mr B was unhappy with the Council’s response and complained to the Ombudsman.

My findings

22. I do not have any concerns about the Council’s investigation of Mr B’s complaint. Mr B raised concerns about the lack of independence because the complaint investigator was part of the service he complained of. The Council says the complaint issue about the investigator was a very narrow point and it was appropriate for them to respond. I agree, I do not have any concerns about the Council’s decision in respect of the investigator.
23. The Council’s information compliance team reviewed the investigation report before a final copy was sent to Mr B. This offered another layer of scrutiny and quality assurance.
24. There were delays responding to Mr B’s complaint, but the Council wrote to Mr B about the delays and told him the new deadline for a response. The delays were not excessive, and the Council kept Mr B updated. I do not find fault with the Council’s complaint handling.
25. The Council was at fault for recording inaccurate information about Mr B in its assessments and reports. It was also at fault for failing to represent Mr B’s views in its assessments. It accepted this fault in its response to Mr B.
26. Mr B says the fault caused him distress. Based on the evidence I do not think the outcome of the strategy discussion or child protection investigation would have been any different. Therefore, I do not think Mr B suffered a significant personal injustice from the Council’s fault.
27. It is important the Council records accurate information and provides a balanced view in its assessments. It should ensure all the relevant parties views are represented. It acknowledged this and made recommendations based on its findings.
28. We welcome the Council’s action to address the inaccuracies and amend the assessments to include Mr B’s comments and views. It also agreed to place a copy of Mr B’s complaint on the children’s files.

Back to top

Final decision

29. I find fault with the Council. This did not cause a significant injustice to Mr B.

Back to top

Parts of the complaint that I did not investigate

30. I did not investigate Mr B’s complaint the Council failed to provide him with information he requested. Mr B should complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO) about this part of his complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman