Summary: I will not investigate this complaint about the way in which the Council dealt with safeguarding concerns raised by the complainant in relation to his children. This is because we are unlikely to be able to add anything further to the Council’s response to the complaint. The remedy offered is within our guidelines.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I refer to here as Mr J, says that the Council:
• Did not investigate properly to his safeguarding concerns with reference to the way his ex-partner cared for their son, C. This relates specifically to a place on C’s arm where a temporary tattoo had been scrubbed off;
• Did not record properly concerns raised by his sister in law, resulting in their omission from a Single Assessment and a Section 7 Report;
• Has not provided an adequate remedy for the elements that have been upheld; and
• Incorrectly started the complaints procedure at stage two.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
3. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
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’. 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 would find fault, or
• it is unlikely we could add to any previous investigation by the Council, or
• it is unlikely further investigation will lead to a different outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered the information provided by Mr J, and I have sent him a draft decision for his comments.

Back to top

What I found

6. Mr J has raised safeguarding concerns in relation to his ex-partner’s care of their son. Although he has made separate complaints regarding other matters, this complaint relates specifically to two issues.
7. The first is a concern about an area on C’s arm where a temporary tattoo was removed by vigorous scrubbing. We will not investigate this issue as we would be unlikely to be able to add to the Council’s previous investigation or to change the outcome as the Council responded appropriately to the complaint.
8. The second issue consists of an allegation that the Council did not record and report properly on concerns raised by Mr J’s sister, so they were not included in the Single Assessment or a Section 7 Report. We will not investigate this issue. The Council has upheld the complaint and there is nothing further for us to add to its response. Additionally, we cannot consider any complaint relating to the Section 7 Report as it informed court proceedings, so it is out of our jurisdiction.
9. Mr J further complains about the way the council handled his complaint. He is unhappy that the council moved directly to stage two of the process, as he feels this denied him a wider stage one response. He also says that the remedy he has been offered for the elements that were upheld is inadequate.
10. We will not generally consider the complaint procedure where we are not looking at the substantive matter. However, the remedy offered for the upheld elements is in line with our guidelines.

Back to top

Final decision

11. I will not investigate this complaint. This is because we are unlikely to be able to add to the Council’s investigation or change the outcome. The remedy for the upheld elements of the complaint to the Council is appropriate.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman