Summary: We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the Council’s actions after she was deregistered as a foster carer. This is because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing a significant injustice.

The complaint

1. Ms X complains about the actions of the Council’s children’s services after she was deregistered as a foster carer. She complains about the Council’s decision to remove foster children from her care and about how the Council considered her safeguarding concerns about the children. She complains about the professional conduct of her social worker and says communication with her was poor.

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, or
• any fault has not caused injustice to the person who complained, or
• any injustice is not significant enough to justify our involvement, or
• there is another body better placed to consider this complaint.

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

3. 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

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

Back to top

My assessment

6. Ms X was deregistered as a foster carer and, as a result, the children she was caring for were removed and placed with another foster carer.
7. I will not investigate the decision to deregister Ms X as a foster carer because there is another body better placed to consider this. Foster carers may ask the Independent Review Mechanism (IRM) to review a decision to recommend deregistration. While the IRM cannot overturn a decision to deregister, neither can the Ombudsman. The IRM is the body set up to consider such matters and is better placed than the Ombudsman to do so.
8. I will not investigate the Council’s decision to remove the children from Ms X’s care. This is because it is unlikely we would find fault with a decision to remove children from a placement once a foster carer has been deregistered. I cannot investigate the decision to place the children together, because this was a decision made by the courts.
9. There is also insufficient evidence of fault with how the Council dealt with Ms X’s safeguarding concerns about the children. The Council considered the concerns alongside relevant information before it concluded that there was insufficient evidence to support Ms X’s claims.
10. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint about the social worker’s conduct. Our role is to investigate the actions of the Council as a corporate body, not to hold a single employee accountable. If Ms X has concerns about the professionalism or integrity of an individual social worker, it is reasonable to expect her to report her concerns to their professional body, Social Work England.
11. I will not investigate Ms X’s complaint that the Council’s communication was poor. I do not consider that this alone has caused Ms X a significant enough injustice to justify our further involvement.

Back to top

Final decision

12. We will not investigate Ms X’s complaint because there is insufficient evidence of fault causing a significant injustice.

Back to top

Investigator's decision on behalf of the Ombudsman