Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s involvement with the complainant son and the delay in its subsequent complaint response. This is because we could not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council:

• failed to inform him of its involvement with his son;
• failed to act to safeguard his son; and
• delayed responding 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
3. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X’s son lived with his mother and her partner. In 2020 Mr X took his son to live with him due to concerns about his safety. He subsequently became aware that his son had been the subject of an assessment by the Council and had been regarded as a Child in Need under Section 17 of the Children Act 1989.
7. Mr X complained to the Council. He argued that, as he holds parental responsibility for his son, he should have been informed of the Council’s involvement and have been consulted during the production of the assessment. Mr X believes the assessment was inadequate and that, as a result of the fault on its part, the Council left his son at risk between January and April 2020. He has asked that the Council compensate him and his son financially.
8. Mr X’s complaint has completed the three stages of the Council’s corporate complaints procedure and has been upheld in part. The Council accepted that Mr X should have been informed of its involvement with his son and consulted during the assessment. It has apologised for this. It has not however accepted Mr X’s contention that, as a result of fault on its part, his son was left at risk.
9. Mr X argues that the Council’s response to his complaint has been unacceptably delayed. The Council accepts that the process was delayed and has apologised. It has offered Mr X symbolic payments in recognition of the delay, and of the fault in relation to the assessment.
10. Mr X does not accept the Council’s response. He does not agree that the key matters have been properly addressed. Specifically, he wants the Council to accept that it left his son at risk of harm.
11. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because we could not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out.
12. There are no grounds for us to reinvestigate those aspects of the complaint which have already been upheld. The Council accepts that it was at fault in relation to the assessment and the complaints process. It has apologised and offered symbolic payments. Our intervention is not therefore warranted.
13. The key outstanding matter is whether the Council’s actions left Mr X’s son at risk. That is not a matter on which we can take a view. It is not separable from the issues before the Court in the course of Mr X’s legal action. By law, the Ombudsman cannot investigate matters which have been considered in a court of law. The question of whether Mr X’s son was unsafe is inextricably bound up with the matters the Court considered. We cannot comment on it.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has already carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman