Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council imposing restrictions on Mr X visiting his partner’s home. There is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

The complaint

1. Mr X said the Council has ignored all evidence and facts and imposed ridiculous restrictions.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

The Ombudsman investigates complaints about ‘maladministration’ and ‘service failure’, which we call ‘fault’. We must also consider whether any fault has had an adverse impact on the person making the complaint, which we call ‘injustice’. We provide a free service, but must use public money carefully. We do not start or may decide not to continue with an investigation if we decide there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

4. The Council’s final complaint response to Mr X states it imposed restrictions because he had been convicted of a specific offence on a specific date and that its judgement was that meant he posed a risk to a child at his partner’s house. The Council’s duty is to protect children from risk of significant harm. It may use its professional judgement to do so. Mr X’s disagreement with its position is unlikely to be evidence of fault.

Back to top

Final decision

5. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman