Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council was at fault in the course of child protection action. This is because there is no evidence of significant fault on the Council’s part.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Mrs X, complains that the Council was at fault in taking her daughter into its care and in failing to support her family during the child protection process.

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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

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. Mrs X’s daughter has been the subject of child protection action Mrs X complains that the Council unreasonably took her into its care. She further complains that the Council’s officers unreasonably threatened to take her other children into care. She believes the Council’s actions were flawed and she would like an apology.
6. In response to Mrs X’s complaint, the Council has said her daughter came into its care when the police exercised their protection powers. It denies that officers spoke to Mrs X in the way she alleges and says she agreed to her daughter remaining in its care when police protection expired. It further points out that her daughter was then placed with a family member before returning home with a safety plan in place.
7. The Ombudsman will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no evidence of significant fault on the Council’s part. Mrs X disagrees that it was necessary to take her daughter into care. That is not a matter on which we can express a view. Once the police exercised their protection powers, it was appropriate for the Council to accommodate Mrs X’s daughter.
8. The Council’s complaint response indicates that Mrs X agreed to her daughter remaining in the Council’s care. Mrs X says this was because the Council’s officer threatened to take her other children into care. The Council denies this was said and the Ombudsman could not make a safe finding on the matter.
9. Either way, the children could not have been removed without a court order. It was open to Mrs X not to agree to her daughter remaining in care. If she had done so, and the Council had decided to take the matter to court, Mrs X would have had the right to make her case against the granting of care orders.
10. We cannot find that the fact that Mrs X’s daughter remained in the Council’s care after the expiry of police protection resulted from fault on the Council’s part. The matter is now within the Public Law Outline process and further action the Council takes may be tested in court.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because there is no evidence of significant fault on the Council’s part.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman