Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about how the Council considered a safeguarding matter, nor its handling of Mr X’s complaint. Further investigation would not add to the findings the Council has already made, and the Council has offered a suitable remedy to Mr X for the injustice caused by delays in complaint handling.

The complaint

1. Mr X complained the Council would not consider his safeguarding concerns, treated him poorly when he visited a Council building, and did not recognise that he held Parental Responsibility for his child.
2. Mr X also said the Council did not adhere to its complaints procedure, with drift and delay in responding to his concerns.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

4. I considered information provided by Mr X and the Council.
5. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

6. Mr X said the Council refused to consider his safeguarding concerns and did not recognise that he holds Parental Responsibility for his child. Mr X also said that when he visited a Council office, social workers refused to see him or consider the information he wished to share with them.
7. Mr X complained to the Council who did not respond within procedural timeframe. When the Council responded, it apologised for the delay, explained what actions it had taken to consider Mr X’s safeguarding concerns and said it would take his experience when visiting the office as learning for staff.
8. Mr X was dissatisfied with the Council’s response to his complaint and requested it be escalated.
9. The Council did not respond to Mr X’s further complaint within procedural timeframe. However, when it did respond it apologised for this and offered Mr X a financial remedy for the time and trouble he had experienced, that is in line with our guidelines.
10. The Council also offered Mr X assistance to get information he wanted about his child.
11. Given the Council has already apologised, taken learning from Mr X’s experience and offered a financial remedy to him, we could not add to the Council’s investigation and are satisfied with its actions.
12. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we decide not to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because further investigation would not add to the findings the Council has already made, and the Council has offered a suitable remedy to him for the injustice any faults caused him.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman