Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and because other agencies are better placed to consider some of the issues raised.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will call Mr X, complains about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. Mr X says his voice has not been heard and as a result his relationship with his daughter has ended.

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:

• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, 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. The Council became involved with Mr X’s child after receiving a safeguarding referral about Mr X in 2017. It ended its involvement and closed the case in June 2022.
7. Mr X complained to the Council in November 2022. He said he was only made aware of the safeguarding referral in June 2020, and that the Council’s subsequent assessment contained inaccurate information. Mr X asked the Council to provide copies of information regarding the care of his child and wanted answers as to why errors were made. Mr X also complained that the Council’s communication with him had been poor up to the point his daughter’s case was closed. Mr X alleges that a social worker involved in the case is involved with organised crime.
8. The Council accepted it had not informed him of the safeguarding referral or included him in the assessment process. The Council could not provide an explanation for his as the social worker and manager involved with the case were no longer employed by the Council. The Council also apologised to Mr X for poor communication.
9. In regard to inaccurate information included in the assessment, the Council said it could consider changes under a right to rectification request but would need more information from Mr X about what he considered to be inaccurate.
10. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council dealt with the safeguarding referral and subsequent assessment and about poor communications. This is because the Council has apologised to Mr X for not informing him of the referral or including him in the assessment and shared learning with the relevant team. This is a proportionate response and therefore further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.
11. Mr X wants answers as to why this happened, but the Council has been unable to provided them due to the time that has elapsed and because the social worker and manager are no longer employed by the Council. Further investigation by the Ombudsman could not add to the one carried out by the Council for the same reasons.
12. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the assessment containing inaccurate information. This is because Mr X has the right to seek records are ‘rectified’. This means any factual errors are corrected. If the Council refuses to do so, he can complain to the Information Commissioner’s Office (ICO). Parliament set up the ICO to consider data protection disputes which includes ‘right to rectification’ disputes. The ICO are better placed than us to consider if the Council should change its records.
13. I will not investigate Mr X’s complaint that a social worker is involved in criminal activity as this is a matter for the police and not the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

14. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council and other agencies are better placed to deal with other matters.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman