Summary: We will not investigate this complaint about the Council’s decision to carry out an assessment after receiving a safeguarding referral involving Mrs X. This is because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

The complaint

1. Mrs X complained the Council carried out a safeguarding assessment using a social worker who was biased in favour of her ex-partner. She also complained about redactions on a referral and a section 7 report.

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))
3. The Local Government Act 1974 sets out our powers but also imposes restrictions on what we can investigate.
4. The Information Commissioner's Office considers complaints about freedom of information. Its decision notices may be appealed to the First Tier Tribunal (Information Rights). So where we receive complaints about freedom of information, we normally consider it reasonable to expect the person to refer the matter to the Information Commissioner.
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 Mrs X and the Council.
7. I considered the Ombudsman’s Assessment Code.

Back to top

My assessment

8. Mrs X complained about the Council’s decision to carry out a safeguarding assessment after receiving a referral about her. She said the social worker who was involved with the assessment was biased and had a relationship to her ex-partner. She also complained the Council made redactions to the original referral and on a section 7 report that was used in court proceedings with her ex-partner.
9. The Council told Mrs X it had spoken to the social worker, and they did not have a personal relationship to her ex-partner. The Council told Mrs X she could request information about the redactions. The Council ultimately decided not to take any further action.
10. Mrs X remains unhappy with the Council’s actions. The Council has a legal duty to act on any information it receives which indicates a child may be at risk of harm. There is no evidence of fault in the Council’s decision making process.
11. Mrs X wants us to find the Council at fault for how it has handled her data. The Ombudsman will not usually exercise discretion to investigate complaints where another body is better placed to deal with it. In this case, it would be reasonable for Mrs X to refer this part of her complaint to the Information Commissioner’s office.
12. Mrs X has also complained about a section 7 report. The Ombudsman does not have jurisdiction to investigate events that took place or are inextricably linked to matters that took place in court.

Back to top

Final decision

13. We will not investigate Mrs X’s complaint because an investigation would be unlikely to find fault with the Council’s actions.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman