Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with Mr B and Ms B’s family. This is because it is unlikely investigation by the Ombudsman would add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainants, who I will refer to as Mr B and Ms B, complain that the Council was at fault throughout its involvement with their family.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We investigate complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse effect on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We may decide not to start an investigation if the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council was involved with Mr B’s family between 2017 and 2019. Three of his children, including Ms B, lived with his estranged wife during that period. Mr B and Ms B complain that the Council was at fault throughout its involvement.
6. Specifically, they complain that the social worker acted with unconscious bias against Mr B as a black man, and that the Council failed to accept his autism and make reasonable adjustments. Mr B contends that, as a result of the unconscious bias, a false allegation against him was recorded and remains part of the record of the case.
7. With regard to Ms B, she and Mr B complain that the Council’s social worker failed to accept and understand her autism, failed to communicate with her properly and failed to offer her appropriate support.
8. Mr B complained to the Council on his own behalf and on behalf of Ms B. His complaint has completed the three stages of the statutory procedure for complaints about children’s services. The Council accepted that the allegation against Mr B was false and apologised. But, other than this, the complaint process did not find significant fault on the part of officers. Mr B disagrees with the findings.
9. As the complaint has completed the statutory complaint procedure, the question for the Ombudsman is whether it is likely that investigation by us would add anything significant, or lead to a different outcome. Mr and Ms B disagree with the outcome of the complaint process, but that does not mean there is fault in the way the matter was considered.
10. The complaint documents show that the complaint was subject to considerable scrutiny throughout the process, and that Mr B was able to participate fully. The findings are comprehensive and defensible and there is no indication of fault in the way they were made.
11. In the circumstances, it is unlikely that investigation by the Ombudsman would add anything significant to the investigation already carried out. Our intervention is not therefore warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr B And Ms B’s complaint because it is unlikely we would add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman