Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about a children and family assessment completed by the Council. This is because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr B, complains that the Council was at fault in the production of a child and family assessment and in its responses to his subsequent complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. 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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or

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

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.
5. The complainant has had the opportunity to comment on my draft decision. I considered his comments before making a final decision.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr B’s children were the subject of a referral to children’s services by the police following an incident. The Council responded by carrying out a children and family assessment.
7. Mr B believes the content of the assessment was biased and inaccurate, giving only a partial account of the police incident and of the wider situation. He says the social worker lied, in that she claimed to have spoken with his son’s nursery when she had not done so. He is also aggrieved that his complaint was initially reviewed by the social work manager who oversaw its production. He further complains that the Council failed to respond to numerous attempts he made to contact it.
8. The Council has made changes to the assessment in response to the representations Mr B has made. He does not believe the changes have addressed his concerns sufficiently. Specifically, he believes the Council has failed to address the issue of the social worker’s false claim to have spoken with the nursery. He argues that one lie in the assessment may mean there are others, and believes a disciplinary penalty is appropriate.
9. We will not investigate Mr B’s complaint because it is unlikely we could achieve anything significant by doing so. The Ombudsman will not normally ask a council to amend an assessment retrospectively, as this forms part of the case record and reflects the officer’s views at the time it is written. It is also the case that a complainant has the right of rectification in law, and can pursue this if they feel the assessment contains false information about them. The most we will seek to achieve in these circumstances is that a record of the complainant’s dissenting view is added to the file.
10. In this case, the Council has upheld Mr B’s complaint in part and has decided to make changes to the assessment. Mr B’s complaint set out his dissenting views and forms part of the file. The Council has already accepted that there is no evidence that the social worker contacted Mr B’s son’s nursery, and that this is poor practice. It says it has amended the assessment accordingly. As the Ombudsman has no power to recommend or comment on disciplinary sanctions, this exhausts the matter. There is nothing significant for the Ombudsman to achieve by investigating as it is unlikely we could add to the findings the Council has already made.
11. Regarding the response to Mr B’s complaint, it is not unusual or unreasonable for a social worker’s line manager to make the initial response to concerns about an assessment. I note that the Council carried out a further review as Mr B remained aggrieved. The numerous contacts Mr B made with the Council must have been frustrating for him. But, given that the substantive matter leading to those contacts does not itself merit investigation, it is not a good use of our resources to pursue this matter separately and we will not do so.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate this complaint. This is because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman