Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council has been at fault in the course of child protection and child in need action in relation to the complainant’s family. This is because we would not add to the investigation which has already been carried out and our intervention is not therefore warranted.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains that the Council has been at fault in the course of child protection and child in need action in relation to her family.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant and the Council.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. Miss X’s family has been the subject of child protection and child in need action over a number of years. Miss X complains that the Council has been at fault throughout its engagement with her family. Specifically, she says that Council has failed to provide the family with appropriate support, falsely accused her of fabricating illness, and failed to find an appropriate educational setting for her son.
6. Miss X made a complaint to the Council, which was considered under the statutory children’s services complaint procedure. The complaint was substantially upheld. The Council accepted the complaint findings and apologised for the identified failings. It agreed to implement all recommendations made at Stage 1 and 2 of the procedure, including a symbolic payment of £1100.
7. Miss X does not believe the financial aspect of the settlement is adequate. She has complained to the Ombudsman, seeking what she describes as correct reimbursement.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we would not add anything to the findings of the investigation which has already been carried out. The statutory children’s services complaint procedure exists precisely to give complaints such as Miss X’s a proper level of scrutiny. The documents show that this has been the case and that the Council has taken account of the Ombudsman’s published guidance in offering a symbolic payment. It is not therefore for us to intervene to substitute alternative findings or recommendations. Our intervention is not warranted.

Back to top

Final decision

9. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because we would not add anything to the investigation which has already been carried out.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman