Summary: We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s child protection actions including that it failed to communicate properly and completed a flawed assessment. There is insufficient injustice to investigate. The Council has reviewed its practice and offered to take appropriate action. We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains the Council failed to communicate with her appropriately during a ‘section 47’ child protection assessment. Mrs X says the Council delayed explaining the process it was following or what was happening with her children. Mrs X says the Council’s assessment failed to properly consider her views, included inaccurate information, and was biased.
2. Mrs X says the Council caused anxiety and affected her ability to work and care for her children. Mrs X says the father of the children used the Council’s assessment against her at court. She was caused legal bills opposing his application to change the childcare arrangements. Mrs X wants the Council to delete the original paperwork and produce a new assessment report.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

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

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. We cannot investigate a complaint about the start of court action or what happened in court. (Local Government Act 1974, Schedule 5/5A, paragraph 1/3, as amended)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by Mrs X and discussed the complaint with her by telephone. The information includes the complaint correspondence with the Council.

Back to top

My assessment

8. I will not investigate this complaint for the following reasons:
9. There is no fault in the Council doing a child protection investigation and assessing the welfare of the children. Mrs X has confirmed with me that one of the children alleged physical harm by a family member.
10. There is insufficient injustice:
1. Mrs X’s children were staying with their father, which was the normal shared care arrangement, when the issue arose. The Council agreed with the father that the children would stay longer with him. Mrs X tells me this was an extra four nights and the children then returned to her.
2. The Council’s complaint reply says it spoke to Mrs X and had an appointment to see her at the office on the day the care arrangement with father was extended. Mrs X did not make the appointment, but she knew the whereabouts of the children and had spoken to the police who were involved.
11. I am satisfied the Council has reviewed its practice. There is insufficient public interest to investigate and we cannot achieve what Mrs X wants:
1. The Council says its social worker saw Mrs X on the Monday but says it should have provided an out of hours contact. It has apologised for feelings of anxiety or uncertainty over the first weekend caused by this omission and the delay in meeting sooner.
2. The Council has acknowledged the social worker failed to include details in the assessment of all the children in the family and that consideration should have been given to the position of each child.
3. The Council says the social worker failed to give enough time for Mrs X to contribute to the later needs assessment. This was corrected and 5 days given.
4. The Council has agreed to produce a document including Mrs X’s correction of facts and criticisms which will be available to be read with the assessments. Producing such an addendum/additional document is an appropriate way for dealing with this situation. The Council should not delete records of its actions or assessments. It is correct to say a new assessment is not appropriate where the case is closed and there is no ongoing need, as here.
12. If Mrs X disagrees with the Council’s handling of her personal data, or believes it holds inaccurate information, it is reasonable for her to go to the Information Commissioner which is the specialist body established to deal with such matters (see paragraph 6).
13. The Ombudsman cannot lawfully investigate what happens in court (see paragraphs 4 and 5 above). This includes the Council’s evidence to court or the use of such evidence at court. Mrs X tells me the court adjusted the child arrangements to 50/50 shared care with the father. We cannot investigate that decision or hold the Council responsible for it.

Back to top

Final decision

14. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about the Council’s child protection actions including that it failed to communicate properly and completed a flawed assessment. There is insufficient injustice to investigate. The Council has reviewed its practice and offered to take appropriate action. We cannot achieve the outcome Mrs X wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman