Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the actions of the Council’s children’s services. This is because the law prevents us from investigating what happened in court proceedings. There is insufficient evidence of fault regarding safeguarding decisions made by the Council and further investigation into other matters would not lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complains about the actions of children’s services in relation to a family member who I will refer to as Y. Mrs X says the case was mismanaged, and inaccurate information was provided during court proceedings.

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:

• there is not enough evidence of fault to justify investigating, 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))

3. If there was no fault in how the organisation made its decision, we cannot question the outcome. (Local Government Act 1974, section 34(3), as amended)
4. 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)

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

5. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
6. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

7. Part of Mrs X’s complaint concerns information that the Council provided to the family courts during proceedings to determine the care arrangements of Y. I cannot investigate this element of Mrs X’s complaint because the law prevents us from investigating what happened in court. This includes any information provided by the Council to the courts during proceedings.
8. I will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint about how safeguarding concerns about the care of Y were dealt with by the Council. The Council considered the concerns and explained why it took the action it did. There is no evidence of fault in how it considered these concerns and in the absence of fault I cannot question the merits of the decisions it made.
9. The Council did uphold some of Mrs X’s complaint, accepting that it communication around court proceedings and subsequent contact arrangements had at time caused confusion. The Council apologised, raised the issues with staff members and offered Mrs X a payment of £500 for the distress its upheld complaints had caused.
10. I will not investigate the elements of Mrs X’s complaint that the Council upheld because the actions taken by the Council are proportionate and in line with what we would expect to see. Therefore, further investigation into these points would not lead to a different outcome. Mrs X wants the Council to take disciplinary action against staff members and to reimburse her for legal fees she paid. However, these are not outcomes that the Ombudsman can achieve.

Back to top

Final decision

11. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because we cannot investigate what happened in court, we cannot question the merits of decisions made without fault and further investigation would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman