Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s decision to place her children on a child protection plan. We cannot consider the merits of the Council’s decision where there is no sign of fault in the process by which it was reached.

The complaint

1. The complainant, whom I shall call Ms X, complains about the Council’s decision to place her children on a child protection plan despite her request that the case be closed. Ms X also complains about the impact of this decision on herself and her 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)
3. We cannot question whether a council’s decision is right or wrong simply because the complainant disagrees with it. We must consider whether there was fault in the way the decision was reached. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. We do not start an investigation if we decide we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Ms X complained to the Council about its decision to place her children on a child protection plan despite her asking for the case to be closed. Ms X says she sees the Council’s decision as a personal attack and discrimination due to her ethnicity.
8. The Council’s complaint responses clearly set out the events and the process it followed which led to this decision being made. It explained all professionals involved were concerned about the children and considered they should be part of a child protection plan and an initial child protection conference be held.
9. Ms X remains dissatisfied with the Council’s response because it has explained the process but has not recognised the injustice she has suffered as a result of the professionals’ decisions. Ms X says she has now moved abroad so she can get her son the medical help he needs and has incurred significant costs in doing so.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint. Whilst Ms X is clearly unhappy with the Council’s decision I have seen no sign of fault in the process by which the Council’s decision to proceed to a child protection conference was made. It is not the Ombudsman’s role to question the merits of decisions that have been made without sign of fault. This was a matter of professional judgement for the Council to decide via the relevant process as set out in its responses. As such, there is nothing further we could add to the response already provided via the Council’s investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman