Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council making a safeguarding referral about Mr X as there is insufficient evidence of injustice to justify an investigation. Part of Mr X’s complaint is late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

The complaint

1. Mr X complains that the Council wrongly made a safeguarding referral to the mental health team instead of properly investigating his concerns about the welfare of children. Mr X considers the Council’s actions caused him to be detained in hospital for three weeks and encouraged the alleged perpetrator of child abuse to harass him.

Back to top

The Ombudsman’s role and powers

2. We cannot investigate late complaints unless we decide there are good reasons. Late complaints are when someone takes more than 12 months to complain to us about something a council has done. (Local Government Act 1974, sections 26B and 34D, as amended)
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 any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement or there is no worthwhile outcome achievable by our investigation. (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. Some years ago, Mr X was detained in hospital for an assessment of his mental health. Mr X said the assessment did not find he had any mental health issues. Mr X said that he subsequently found out that the Council made a safeguarding referral which caused his detention in hospital. He considered the Council made the safeguarding referral instead of investigating his concerns about child welfare.
7. In 2024, Mr X became aware of the Council’s safeguarding referral and made a complaint to the Council. The Council did not initially investigate Mr X’s complaint. It then considered the complaint in 2025. The Council explained it made the safeguarding referral to adult social care as officers were concerned about his welfare. The Council also said it had considered Mr X’s child protection referrals.
8. We will only investigate a complaint where we consider the person complaining has suffered significant injustice as a direct result of faults by a council. Even if the Council was at fault in making the safeguarding referral, this did not directly lead to Mr X’s detention in hospital. A decision to detain a person in hospital is taken by doctors and an approved mental health practitioner. It is for them to satisfy themselves that there are grounds for detention. So, the decision to detain Mr X in hospital was not made by the Council. We also do not consider that any fault in the Council’s decision to make a safeguarding referral could have directly caused the alleged perpetrator of child abuse to harass Mr X.
9. So, we will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about the safeguarding referral. This is because it did not cause significant enough injustice to Mr X to justify an investigation.
10. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint about how the Council considered his child protection referrals. The events occurred approximately three to four years ago so the complaint is late. Mr X would have been aware at the time of his concerns about how the Council dealt with his referrals. We are mindful that the Council did not initially investigate his complaint in 2024. But it was open to Mr X to make the complaint to the Council and to us before 2024. So, there are no good reasons to investigate this aspect of Mr X’s complaint. In any event, we could not achieve anything for Mr X by investigating the complaint now.
11. We will not investigate how the Council dealt with Mr X’s complaint. It is not a good use of public resources to investigate complaints about complaint procedures, if we are unable to deal with the substantive issue.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Mr X’s complaint. This is because any fault by the Council would not have caused significant enough injustice to justify an investigation of his complaint. Part of Mr X’s complaint is also late and there are no good reasons to investigate it now.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman