Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council has dealt with matters relating to the care of her child. This is because it concerns matters that have either been considered in court or can only be challenged in court. There is insufficient evidence of fault in how the Council carried out its investigation about other matters, so further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Ms X, complains about the Council’s involvement with her family. Ms X says a decision to remove her child from her care was unfair and that the Council should support Ms X to enable her child to be reunited with her. Ms X says the Council has failed to safeguard her child whilst in foster care and that it has failed to provide her with an interpreter.

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 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 continue an investigation if we decide:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), as amended)

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. In October 2020, the Council completed an assessment which concluded that Ms X could not meet the needs of her child. The Courts subsequently granted a final care order, placing Ms X’s child with long-term foster carers. The court concluded that reunification between Ms X and her child was not an option. The Council’s view remains that Ms X is unable to meet the needs of her child and it therefore does not support reunification.
8. The Council considered Ms X’s complaint under the statutory process for children’s complaints. It did not uphold any of Ms X’s complaint, finding that decisions had been made in the best interests of her child, that Ms X’s concerns about safeguarding were properly considered and unfounded and that appropriate translation services were in place for Ms X.
9. We cannot investigate the Council’s actions in relation to care proceedings which resulted in Ms X’s child being removed from her care. The law prevents us from investigating complaints about court proceedings, including information provided to the courts by councils.
10. The Court stated that reunification between Ms X and her child should not be considered. The Council agrees with this, as it feels Ms X cannot meet the needs of her child and for this reason is not proposing reunification for Ms X and her child. We will not investigate this element of Ms X’s complaint because if Ms X wants to challenge these decisions she can only do so in court. Only the courts can decide if Ms X’s child should be returned to her care.
11. There are elements of Ms X’s complaint which are separable from the court process. However, we would not reinvestigate a complaint that has gone through the statutory process for children’s complaints, unless there is evidence of fault or omission in the Council’s consideration under the process.
12. I have reviewed the stage 2 investigation reports and stage 3 panel review report and have seen no evidence to suggest the complaints process was flawed.
13. I will not investigate the elements of Ms X’s complaint separable from the court process. This is because there is no evidence of fault with the way her complaint was investigated by the Council under the statutory children complaints procedure. Because we are unlikely to find fault with the way the complaint was investigated, an investigation by us would not lead to a different outcome. This is because the findings already made under the statutory complaint’s procedure should be relied on.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because matters relating to the care of her child have either been considered in court or can only be challenged in court. Further investigation into other matters would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman