Summary: We will not investigate this complaint that the Council’s officers have been at fault throughout their involvement with the complainant’s family. This is because investigation would not achieve the outcomes she is seeking.

The complaint

1. The complainant, Miss X, complains that the Council’s children’s services officers have been at fault throughout the Council’s involvement with 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 effect 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 an investigation if we decide the tests set out in our Assessment Code are not met. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended)

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 says the Council has been involved with her family since 2023 and throughout 2024. She has provided correspondence which shows that her children have, at various points, been regarded as Children in Need and have been subject to Child Protection plans.
6. Miss X says that, throughout the period, the Council has lied to her and recorded false information in reports and on its files. She says it has ignored her concerns about her former husband and has instead taken his side. She says the Council’s actions have caused her significant distress.
7. Miss X wants the Council to accept that it has been at fault and apologise to her. She wants it to correct the information on its files and remove the opinions of officers from the record. In addition, she wants disciplinary action taken against the officers involved in her case.
8. The Ombudsman will not investigate Miss X’s complaint. She has provided considerable correspondence which shows she disagrees with the involvement of Children’s Services with her family, and with the views officers have taken. But that is not evidence that the Council has been at fault. Our intervention is not warranted because we cannot achieve what she wants.
9. Part of the purpose of case records is to record the professional opinions of officers. The Ombudsman will not ask for such records to be altered retrospectively. The most we would normally expect is that a record of the complainant’s dissenting views is placed on the file. Miss X’s views are set out in the complaints she has made. These form part of the case record, so there is nothing further we would seek to achieve.
10. Neither is it for us to take a view on whether the information recorded on the files is accurate. If Miss X believes it is not, her recourse is to pursue her Right to Rectification. If she is unhappy with the outcome, she may bring her concerns to the Information Commissioner’s Office, which is better placed than the Ombudsman to consider them.
11. The Ombudsman considers complaints about councils as corporate bodies, not about individuals, and we have no power to comment on personnel matters. That being the case, investigation could not lead to disciplinary action, even if fault was identified. We cannot therefore achieve the outcomes Miss X is seeking.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Miss X’s complaint because investigation would not achieve what she wants.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman