Summary: We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the Council’s children’s service’s involvement with her family. There is not enough evidence of fault to justify our involvement and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Miss X complained about how the Council dealt with child protection concerns it had for her children. She said it made an abrupt decision for a safety plan that had negatively affected her family. She said its safeguarding decisions were based on incorrect information.
2. Miss X also complained about the conduct of the Chair of the Initial Child Protection Conference (ICPC). She said they were intimidating and lacked impartiality. She said advice from the Chair had triggered another attendee at the ICPC to take legal action. She said the Council’s actions had affected her career, finances and psychological wellbeing.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

3. 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))

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. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint about the safeguarding decisions the Council took around her children. In the Council’s complaint response, it said the nature of its concerns meant it had to ensure the immediate safety of Miss X’s children. It did that through a safety plan. I appreciate the Council asked Miss X to implement that plan at short notice, however, the Council has explained why it was necessary.
7. The Council apologised to Miss X for an error in its assessment, however it explained that did not change its view of the safeguarding concerns.
8. The Council has set out its concerns to Miss X and why it took the action it did. It discussed these concerns and the need for the safety plan at the ICPC. There is not enough evidence of fault in the Council’s actions to justify our involvement.
9. We will also not investigate the behaviour of the ICPC Chair. The Council discussed the complaint with the Chair and apologised if Miss X felt intimidated. It said the Chair had spoken to other attendees at the meeting but said the Chair had remained impartial. I am satisfied the Council has fully considered the complaint. The Council is not responsible if another attendee from the ICPC had decided to take legal action. Further investigation by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman