Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection action in respect of the complainant’s children. This is because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs B, complains that the Council was at fault in the course of child protection action and in making her children subject to child protection plans.

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. Mrs B’s children are the subject of child protection plans. Mrs B complains about fault in the child and family assessment the Council’s social worker carried out and in the conduct of the initial child protection conference.
6. Mrs B contends that the evidence presented in the children and family assessment was exaggerated, and that the Council failed to address her concerns about the accuracy of information provided by a school. Regarding the initial child protection conference, she complains that her concerns were not properly considered and, as a result, the decision to make her children subject to child protection plans was flawed. She further complains that the Council has not corrected errors in the minutes of the meeting.
7. Mrs B says she wants the documents to be corrected and the child protection plans ended with immediate effect.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because we cannot achieve anything significant by doing so. We will not normally ask a council to make amendments to assessments retrospectively because their contents reflect the position at the time they were written. Where appropriate, we may ask the council to include a copy of the complainant’s contrary views on the file. The complainant has already set these views out in her complaint, which forms part of toe record of the case, so our intervention is unnecessary.
9. If Mrs B believes the documents contain statements which are factually inaccurate, she may pursue her right to rectification. Her concerns may be brought to the attention of the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider them.
10. An investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to the ending of the child protection plans. That is a matter for the professional judgement of the officers concerned and it is not for us to substitute an alternative view.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs B’s complaint because we would not achieve anything significant by doing so.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman