Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about child protection matters. This is because most of the issues raised have either been considered in court or could be raised in court. In regard to other issues raised, we could either not add to the investigation carried out by the Council, or achieve a different outcome.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the council’s children’s services has recorded inaccurate information about him in a Section 7 report, failed to properly consider his views and supported his ex-partner in attacking him and preventing him from seeing his child.

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
• we could not add to any previous investigation by the organisation, or
• further investigation would not lead to a different outcome, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. 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)
4. The law says we cannot normally investigate a complaint when someone could take the matter to court. However, we may decide to investigate if we consider it would be unreasonable to expect the person to go to court. (Local Government Act 1974, section 26(6)(c), 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. Much of Mr X’s complaint is about the contents of a Section 7 report to the court and about the Council’s involvement with the ongoing contact arrangements between he and his child. The law expressly prohibits us from investigating what happened during court proceedings. This includes the content of the Council’s reports to the court. If Mr X feels that the Council is in breach of the court order it is reasonable for him to refer the matter back to the courts. For this reason I will not investigate these elements of Mr X’s complaint.
8. Mr X claims that a social worker convinced his ex-partner to attack Mr X in his home. The Council investigated this point and found no evidence to support Mr X’s claim. I will not investigate this element of Mr X’s complaint because in the absence of any supporting evidence we could not add to the investigation carried out by the Council. Furthermore, any complaint about the conduct of a social worker is better dealt with by Social Work England.
9. The Council did acknowledge that Child in Need meetings had not been held every six weeks and therefore Mr X had not been invited to them as regularly as he should have been. A reminder was sent to staff to hold meetings every six weeks and Mr X’s social worker was asked to inform Mr X of the date of the next meeting. This is an appropriate response and further investigation into this point by the Ombudsman would not lead to a different outcome.

Back to top

Final decision

10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because most of the issues raised have either been considered in court or could be raised in court. In regard to other issues raised, we could either not add to the investigation carried out by the Council, or achieve a different outcome.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman