Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s safeguarding officer substantiating a safeguarding concern in a matter involving Mr X. There is not enough evidence of fault by the Council to warrant our further involvement.

The complaint

1. Mr X said there was fault in the way the Council substantiated a safeguarding concern in a matter involving him.

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.

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

Back to top

How I considered this complaint

3. I considered information provided by the complainant.
4. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

5. The Council received a referral about Mr X from a school. It fell to the Local Authority Designated Officer (LADO) to consider as it was about someone working with children and young people.
6. The LADO gathered information and decided Mr X had taken the actions set out in the referral. They could do that. That Mr X disputes some of the matters raised took place, and disagrees with the interpretation of other matters does not mean investigation by us would be likely to lead to a finding of fault in the LADO’s actions. Nor does Mr X’s dissatisfaction with the way the LADO process as set up by government works..

Back to top

Final decision

7. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint because there is not enough evidence of fault by the LADO to warrant investigation.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman