Summary: We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint that the Council has failed to safeguard her and her daughter and has failed to act in their best interests. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the investigation the Council has carried out, and we cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs B is seeking.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council has failed to safeguard her and her daughter, and has failed to act in their best interests. As a result, she has been caused significant distress and no longer has contact with her daughter.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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, or

• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

3. We have the power to start or discontinue an investigation into a complaint within our jurisdiction. We may decide not to start or continue with an investigation if we think the issues could reasonably be, or have been, raised within a court of law. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 24A(6) and 34B(8), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I have considered what Mrs B has said in support of her complaint and the documents she has provided. I have considered the complaint correspondence provided by the Council. I have also taken account of Mrs B’s responses to a draft of my decision.
6. I have read but have not taken account of Mrs B’s comments and documents relating to the actions of the police or the Court. By law, these matters do not fall to the Ombudsman to investigate.

Back to top

What I found

7. Mrs B’s daughter was the subject of a child protection enquiry and assessment by the Council due to concerns about her welfare. It decided to treat Mrs B’s daughter as a Child in Need. It later stepped its involvement down to the provision of family support. The child currently lives with her father and the evidence shows that the Council has no concerns about her welfare.
8. Mrs B initially complained to the Council about what she regarded as inaccuracies in the Child and Family Assessment. She later complained about actions and omissions on the Council’s part, which she said amounted to a failure to safeguard her and her daughter. Ms B argues that the case did not meet the threshold for the Council’s intervention, and that the Council provided false evidence in Court, which were material to the Court’s decisions.
9. Mrs B’s complaint has completed the three stages of the statutory procedure for Children’s Services complaints. It was upheld in part. Mrs B disagrees with the complaint findings on those aspects of the complaint which were not upheld. She argues that these findings were based on partial information.
10. In settlement of her complaint, Mrs B wants the Council to uphold all parts of her complaint and contact the Court to make it aware that the evidence it provided was flawed. She also wants the Council to make her daughter available for contact.
11. We will not investigate this complaint because it is unlikely we could add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out. On the face of it, there was no procedural fault in the way the Council investigated the complaint. I note that Miss B had the proper opportunity to agree the heads of complaint. She was able to address her dissatisfaction with some of the Stage 2 findings at Stage 3, and the Review Panel’s findings clearly take her views into account.
12. The fact that the Review Panel did not uphold all parts of the complaint is not, in itself, indicative of fault. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to reinvestigate matters if there is no evidence of fault in the way they have been considered. That is the case here.
13. Even if it could be shown that the outcome of the Council’s investigation was flawed, that would not lead us to investigate Mrs B’s complaint. This is because we cannot achieve the outcomes she is seeking. By law, we cannot express a view on the evidence the Council gave in Court. It is not for the Ombudsman to intervene in the legal process and we cannot consider what evidence, if any, the Council should bring to the Court’s attention. It is open to Mrs B to take matters back to Court and it would be for the Court to decide what information it needs.
14. It is also the case that the Council cannot make Mrs B’s daughter available for contact. It has no power to do so. Again, this is a matter for the Courts, and we will not intervene.

Back to top

Final decision

15. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because it is unlikely we could add anything to the investigation the Council has carried out, and we cannot achieve the outcomes Mrs B is seeking.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman