Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about alleged fault in child protection action relating to the complainant’s son. This is because we could not add anything significant to the investigation the Council has carried out.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mr X, complains that the Council was at fault in the process of child protection action in relation to his son.

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
• we cannot achieve the outcome someone wants.

(Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Mr X’s son was the subject of a child protection enquiry under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989. He was made subject to a child protection plan.
6. Mr X alleges that the Council’s officers were at fault throughout the process. He says they acted with bias against him and excluded him from the process. He complains that the Council’s actions have contributed to the break-up of the family and his alienation from his son.
7. Mr X’s complaint has completed the Council’s complaints procedure. It was not substantially upheld, though the investigating officer did find instances where information was not shared with Mr X in a timely fashion. Mr X does not accept the findings of the investigation.
8. For an investigation by the Ombudsman to be warranted, there would need to be a realistic prospect that we could add substantially to the findings of the investigation the Council has already carried out. That is not the case here.
9. Mr X has provided the report completed by the investigating officer and the Council’s response to it. These show that his complaint has received a proper level of scrutiny and the allegations he has made have been closely examined. While I understand that Mr X does not agree with them, the conclusions reached are proportionate and defensible. That being the case, the Ombudsman will not intervene to reinvestigate the matter.
10. It is also the case that the Ombudsman cannot achieve anything significant for Mr X by investigating. Whether he should have contact with his son is a matter which can only be definitively established in court. There is no role for us.

Back to top

Final decision

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

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman