Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about Child Protection action in relation to the complainant’s children. Part of the complaint is late, and the Ombudsman’s intervention would not add to the investigation the Council has carried out or lead to a different outcome.

The complaint

1. The complainant, who I will refer to as Miss X, complains that the Council has been at fault in the course of Child Protection action relating 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))
3. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)

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. Miss X’s children were made subject to Child Protection Plans in July 2023, following an enquiry carried out under Section 47 of the Children Act 1989. Subsequent Child Protection Conferences have decided the Plans remain appropriate.
7. Miss X complains that the Council failed to properly explain the distinction between Child in Need and Child Protection action when it decided to initiate the Section 47 enquiry. She says it has been difficult for her to work with Council officers, who have produced inaccurate reports and have failed to provide them to her on time.
8. Miss X says she wants the Council to acknowledge that it has made mistakes and provide a financial settlement. She also wants the false information held on the case files to be rectified.
9. There are insufficient grounds for the Ombudsman to investigate Miss X’s complaint. The correspondence shows that the discussions around treating the children as Children in Need took place before July 2023. This aspect of the complaint is therefore late. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us. That is the case here and there are no grounds for us to consider this part of the complaint now.
10. The other aspects of Miss X’s complaint relate to the conduct of, and decisions made, by Child Protection Conferences, and the information provided to them. The correspondence shows that these matters have been considered under the Council’s corporate complaints procedure. The findings appear robust and proportionate, and it is unlikely that investigation by the Ombudsman would add significantly to them.
11. It is not for the Ombudsman to take a view on whether it was appropriate to make or maintain Child Protection Plans. That was a matter for the professional judgement of the members of the multi-agency Child Protection Conferences. Neither can we express an opinion on whether it is appropriate to end the Child Protection Plans and step the case down.
12. The Council upheld Miss X’s complaint that reports had been issued late and has apologised. There is however no evidence that this fault significantly compromised Miss X’s ability to contribute to the process, or led to an outcome which would not otherwise have been the case. If Miss X believes the Council’s records contain inaccuracies, her recourse is to pursue her Right of Rectification under the General Data Protection Regulation. There is no role for the Ombudsman.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. Part of the complaint is late, and the Ombudsman’s intervention would not add to the investigation the Council has carried out, or lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman