Summary: We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the Council’s response to his concerns about the risks posed to his niece by the court’s decision she should live with her mother. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council to warrant an investigation

The complaint

1. Mr X complains the Council has not acted on his safeguarding concerns for his niece following the court’s decision that she be placed in her mother’s care. Mr X believes the court’s decision has put his niece at serious risk of harm due to significant concerns around the mother’s history. Mr X would like the Council to carry out a reassessment of the mother’s ability to provide a safe and stable environment for her 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 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)
3. 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. (Local Government Act 1974, section 24A(6), as amended, section 34(B))

4. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
5. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mr X raised concerns to the Council about the risks posed to his niece by the court’s decision to place her in her mother’s care, as set out above.
9. The Council advised Mr X to seek legal advice in relation to his concerns about the court’s decision as any challenge to the court’s decision and current arrangements would need to be made to the court. It explained it cannot overrule the court’s decision or make any changes to what the court has decided. It also explained it could not share any information with Mr X because he does not hold parental responsibility for his niece. Also, it has no current involvement or role with Mr X’s niece as her case is now with a different council.
10. The Council confirmed, in response to our initial enquiries, that it forwarded Mr X’s concerns to the council currently involved with his niece. I can see from the correspondence provided that Mr X has also done the same.
11. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because there is no sign of fault in the way the Council responded to Mr X’s concerns. It has provided him with suitable signposting information around challenging the court’s decision and has forwarded his concerns to the current council having explained it has no current role in the case. There is nothing further we could add were we to also investigate.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault by the Council here to warrant an investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman