Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s Care Planning and Support Team and its involvement with Mr X’s family. An investigation would be unlikely to add anything to the responses the Council has already sent. The law also prevents us from considering matters which have been or could be raised in court. Other bodies are better placed to consider some parts of Mr X’s complaint.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Mr X, complained about the Council’s Care Planning and Support Team and its involvement with his family. Mr X complained about a family and parenting assessment he considered to be biased, inappropriate comments from a social worker, the care his partner received during a high-risk pregnancy, and contact arrangements not being adhered to. Mr X is unhappy a social worker referred to in his complaint continues to be employed by the Council. Mr X also complains of a data breach and how the Council dealt with his complaint.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
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
• 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, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint, or
• there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation.

4. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))
5. 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)
6. We normally expect someone to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner’s if they have a complaint about data protection. However, we may decide to investigate if we think there are good reasons. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

7. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
8. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

9. The Council have been involved with Mr X and his family. The Council’s involvement includes family and parenting assessments. There have been court proceedings with Mr X’s children placed in foster care. Mr X has complained to the Council as I describe in paragraph 1. The Council has responded to his complaint.
10. I recognise how important the issues at the heart of this complaint are to Mr X. But we will not start an investigation into his complaint. There are various reasons for this decision.
• The Council has considered Mr X’s concerns about the family and parenting assessment he felt was biased. The Council decided this was not the case. The original assessment and complaint response are primarily decisions of professional judgement. If we investigated, it is unlikely we would criticise the outcomes.
• The Council said there was no evidence a social worker made an inappropriate comment. It is unlikely we could now reach a safe conclusion about what happened and there are clearly conflicting views. Mr X is unhappy the social worker involved is still working for the Council. That is not a decision for the Ombudsman. If Mr X has concerns about their fitness to practice, he can contact Social Work England as the relevant regulator.
• Mr X says the Council’s actions toward his partner led to the death of their daughter. This is not something we could ever establish.
• The contact arrangements for Mr X’s family were decided in court. We have no powers to consider matters discussed in court or which could be raised in court. If Mr X feels the arrangements are not being met or wants them changing, it is a matter for the courts.
• Mr X says the Council wrongly shared personal information. That is not a matter for the Ombudsman. It is instead for the ICO as the body set up by Parliament to consider such matters.
• The Council agreed to several requests from Mr X in its stage 1 response. We could not achieve anything more.
• Mr X is unhappy with how the Council dealt with his complaint. That is ultimately a matter for the Council. It is not a good use of our resources to look at complaint handling if we are not going to look at the issues which led to the complaint.
11. For the reasons above an investigation by the Ombudsman is not warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. It is unlikely we could add to the Council’s response, and we cannot consider matters relating to court proceedings. There are other bodies better placed to consider parts of this complaint.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman